3 Battery Generating System

[tachyoncatcher]

not going anywhere

Bob,
That thread's not going anywhere. It has been up on OU since 2007. Read page 4. Conventional stuff. Sorry. I do find the scope shots of the trafo output quite interesting.
Randy

[Bob Smith]

Circuit Producing Very Similar Effect

I believe the circuit in the thread linked below may have produced the desired effect or something very similar: The circuit involved using a dead 12V lead-acid battery to brightly light a 60W incandescent bulb. The builder used the little voltage left in the battery to power a 555 timer switch and FET, altering the frequency with a couple of pots off the 6th, 7th and 8th legs of the 555, then stepped up the voltage thru a transformer with an Avramenko type diode setup at the trafo output.

Once the proper frequency was reached, it appears that power came flooding through the setup to brightly light the bulb. Reminds me of Duncan's remarks yesterday about achieving the 3BGS effect thru battery resonance.

Schematic is on third page - See Harti's post with 2 variations.
I'd advise copying this; it may not last long now:
Appears to be overunity Cicuit

I don't mean to send anyone on a wild goose chase, but I do believe this circuit may have part of the answer to reproducing this 3BGS effect with solid state equipment. There was an accompanying video on YT - no longer online.
Bob

Edit: Read thru post again, maybe this had more to do with coil/transformer resonance. I guess the dead LA battery was what I remembered most. My apologies.

[Matthew Jones]

I took this down...

[Turion]

Farmhand,
When you posted at OU, you said:
I was wondering, with all due respect. To those who claim something special is going on and there is a more energy out than energy in situation or effect taking place. 1) Exactly how can it be that more energy can come out of a device than energy that goes into a device, including all the energy contained in the batteries right from the point of construction and including the energy contained within the matter of the device itself, and the initial energy required to first charge the batteries ? 2) In other words how can anyone expect to get more energy out of a device over an extended period than work that was done to create the materials and construct all the parts of the device in the first place and all the energy contained within the materials the device is actually made from ? The way I see it it is completely impossible for any system to output more energy then is input into said system at all previous stages of construction of the materials and device. ie. The energy used to initially charge all the batteries and the energy locked up in all of the actual matter the entire device is constructed from. Logic and common sense says that for it to come out it must first go in, unless something is created from nothing. In other words actual OU is impossible by definition. Energy cannot be created from nothing, it is not possible to create any actual thing or work from nothing. To me that is pure logic. Therefore logic tells us that any energy coming out of any device simply has to have gone into the device at some point previously, before it is possible for it to come out. So I ask can anyone explain exactly how they expect a device to output more energy than is input into the device and it's components previously ?

__________________________
I assume we have answered that question by our position that energy is not coming FROM our device, but THROUGH our device from an unknown source. Much as an antenna converts one form of energy to another more usable form. And I would argue that most free energy researchers hold that exact SAME position. Those of us who believe in the ability of a device to put out more energy than WE put into it have never believed that we are "creating" energy. Only that we are converting it from a non usable (to us) form to a usable form.

I find it curious that your way of avoiding answering Matt's questions concerning your testing methods is to refuse to answer because he insulted you. When according to you it is all "water off a duck's back" except when you don't want it to be.

When I said "up to your old tricks" I meant coming onto a thread and insinuating that whoever it is that began the thread has no idea what they are doing, which is EXACTLY what you are doing when you post statements like you did. It wasn't constructive. It was combative. And you did it on purpose. Look how the entire direction of that thread has been diverted.

And your statement was ABSOLUTELY ridiculous! It is like saying that before I can count the horsepower a 350 chevy produces I must first show that I have produced as much horsepower as it took to mine, refine, smelt, mold, shape and combine every single piece of metal and plastic on the engine, and until I do that, the horsepower doesn't count. If you can't see how ridiculous that sounds, I feel for you man.

I DO believe that we need to be better in our testing procedures, but not everybody has the money to perform the tests folks would like to have run. Nor do they have the TIME TO WASTE testing for others when they already KNOW this thing works. Working with this stuff is NOT their full time job. I am willing to invest the money WHEN I HAVE IT, because I too believe it is important to be as accurate as possible. I am retired, so I have more time than most. But when skeptics won't accept things like the results a kilowatt meter puts out because they are "too inaccurate" I have NO respect for that individual. When you have been running the same kinds of motors off the same kind of batteries for five years like I have, you have a fairly good idea of how long that motor should run off that battery, and when you get abnormally long runs, you don't need meters or gauges to tell you that something different is going on.

I have no reason or need to lie about my results. I am not selling "kits" to make money like some people here are. I am not selling books that explain how to build the setup or how to balance the loads to get it to work. All that has been freely shared. All I am asking is that people try this for themselves and prove it to THEMSELVES that this is real. And then HELP figure out how to make it replicable so everyone in the world can have it for free. And yet we have people who come on here and claim our results or methods are faulty when they have never even tried to replicate what we are doing CORRECTLY. Why would someone do that?

And they do it under the guise of wanting to make sure OTHER people don't waste their time and money on something that doesn't work. If they are so concerned for their fellow man, why not invest a little money and find out for themselves so that their opinion would mean something? But they never do that. They insist the burden of proof is ours and they are the noble watchdogs of truth. I have a different word I would use to describe them, but my momma would wash my mouth out with soap.

As to my not valuing comments by folks who haven't built anything. I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion, but to tell people why something can't work or doesn't work when we have seen it work with our own eyes and they have not...I guess you're probably right...I DON'T value their opinion. If they have built it and say that, then I would work as hard as I could to help them fix it so they can see the same results I have seen.

Iamnuts,
Thanks for all YOUR meaningful contributions to the research going on here. I value your comments almost as much as I value your posted research results. We are not concerned about winning any prize. When we have a stable working device, there will be plenty of money to go around.

Dave

[Iamnuts]

Farmhand, if this thing works they won't have any trouble winning Stefan's
Overunity.com prize will they?
John.

[Farmhand]

Dave I only posted here because you had a dig at me for posting over there and
more or less dared me to post here, you copied my post over, fair enough but
when you say I am up to my old tricks again that is implying I am doing wrong.

I didn't respond to Matt because he is insulting me, simple.

The text about riding out of town was what I would call, "sarcastic humor"
and I was painting some comical literary imagery to go with it.

....

Now in all seriousness if you are going to allow any comments and input from non
experimenters then it ought to be accepted and considered no matter if it is a
"yes man" comment or a skeptics comment.

If non builders that bring up valid questions are attacked then maybe you
should consider only allowing any input on the theory from people with
demonstrated builds in progress.

....

I still think the point I am trying to make is misunderstood and people are
misrepresenting me.

I never said it didn't work did I ? If I did please show me where. As far as
Matt goes he can be as rude as he likes, it's like water off a ducks back to me,
I'll just not interact with him, concerning any posts with insults ect. in them.
If I respond things will just escalate. My responding without insulting him back
would be like behaving as if I was his child. And if I respond and insult him
back I see no real benefit to that.

If he addresses me in a post with no insults, I might answer, I don't hold
grudges.

..

The way I see it people seem to expand what I mean by what I said, make
false assumptions or misunderstand me.

Best wishes to all.

..

[Turion]

Farmhand Leaving

I wanted to comment about Farmhand's decision to leave. Yes, Matt was hard on him. Matt has no patience with folks who come on here and say this doesn't work but have not done the testing that he has done. Matt has spent a LOT of money on test equipment that most of us don't have, which is one of the reasons I run EVERYTHING past him. I probably annoy the heck out if him at times, but he has the means to test some things that I do not.

Farmhand chose not to respond to Matt's questions as to how he tested his batteries, and that is his choice. I find it interesting that when skeptics call our results into question it is always our test methods that are questioned, but the instant we show that we are using EXACTLY the right kind of test equipment and question how they got THEIR results, they head for the hills.

By the way, when I first met Matt in person and told him my story about the 3BGS, I'm pretty sure he didn't believe it either. He didn't know me and had no reason to trust me, and it sounded like a fairy tale. And Matt is just like me, in that if he can't see it on his bench, it isn't for real. It wasn't until a couple folks he trusts had tried it and gotten positive results that he even began messing with it. So he was a skeptic at first too. The difference is, he took the time to build it and test it for himself. The results he has confidence in ore not MY results, they are his own. His theories about how and why this works are based on what HE sees on HIS bench, not on what I tell him I see.

I don't think this is a question of IF this works any longer. Too many people have seen that it does. Yes, our testing methods may not have been as sophisticated as some people would like, but when one setup runs a hundred watt bulb for only a few hours and another one runs the bulb for days, it isn't rocket science to decide you are getting more out of one system than another. So the skeptics will argue that one bulb was brighter than the other because the don't WANT to believe for some reason.

Anyway, all my parts are in for the test I said I would run. I may have to make a run to Lowes for pvc and connectors. But will get that done no later than tomorrow. So will begin testing sometime tomorrow. I'm on crutches right now, so not getting around real fast and I have deadlines I need to meet in other areas. Hopefully the test I will run will satisfy some of the doubters, but probably not.

Dave

[Turion]

Building Things

We have seen all kinds of ideas and theories shared here, but what is lacking is a schematic to build something. We have Randy's addition of the second bad battery or transducer that has been added to the original 3BGS circuit, as well as a coil of litzed wire. And then the earth ground that he added. Are each of these parts still viable? How many folks have replicated this particular circuit. How many did it with litzed wire?

If we're ever going to make progress we have to start with a basic circuit and make SMALL changes and recored the results. That's the scientific method.

If we accept the idea that you only need ONE battery and can flip the polarity on it and get results, what are we going to use to flip that battery so that everyone who wants to TRY can do it exactly the same way...consistently...and get the SAME results. Talk and theory is great, but we need to start somewhere with a specific circuit and then work to change and improve it.

Anybody got any ideas on where to begin? Because we can keep talking forever and we're never going to solve this. We need to be building. I can build, but I have never pretended to be as experienced as many here at devising circuits or understanding how they function. I'm still learning a whole lot about electronics and if it wasn't for folks like Matt who have helped me out along the way, I would have been dead in the water a long time ago.

So, who has an idea for a circuit to build? And if we're going to have a discussion, let it be about a specific circuit, rather than a theory. We need to stop so much talking and start with the building.

[Duncan]

Dave you were right, I'm on my horse and whipping its shoulders with the reigns,
heading the for town gate, I'm hightailing it out of here, just as quick as I would
leave a town infested with the plague. I'm run out of town no doubt. Glad for it
too.

Bye bye. Oh and no hard feelings, good luck and best wishes. I'm a big boy I can
take it like water off a ducks back.

..

sadly missed

[Farmhand]

Dave you were right, I'm on my horse and whipping its shoulders with the reigns,
heading the for town gate, I'm hightailing it out of here, just as quick as I would
leave a town infested with the plague. I'm run out of town no doubt. Glad for it
too.

Bye bye. Oh and no hard feelings, good luck and best wishes. I'm a big boy I can
take it like water off a ducks back.

..

[tachyoncatcher]

Magnetics

http://www.energeticforum.com/images...s/thumbsup.gif
If I wanted to try and explain in as few words as I could -- that would be them you have grasped the mettle

Guys,
Lets not forget the magnetic phasing that needs to take place so we can chase the electrostatic where we want it. Resonance, by itself, is not enough. Luther explained it best.
Randy

[LutherG]

@erfinder

We definitely need to skype soon!

@Mario,

Great to see you here! How are things with the OTG Group? Say hello to the guys for me ok? About pulsing with a cap, an inverted cap pulser might work along these lines... I would suggest using 2 motors until we get a better handle on what's actually happening here...

@lightend,

Try doing that and let us know how it turns out. Have you built the 3BGS or 5BGS yet?

@All,

My thoughts I posted are just that - my thoughts on this based on running the system and observing how its working that leads me the conclusions I've come to so far. I believe this system is actually very simple and I am only reporting on the part of the elephant I am able to observe. Our disadvantage comes from not being able to actually see how the magnetic fields are interacting. So, we're left to experimentation and observation. We do know without question that once the battery goes negative some very interesting things happen... Do not assume anything! Battery banks have flash-charged with this system so do not assume - let the system show you what can happen - this way you won't be boxed-in and miss something important...

Best regards to all,

Luther

[Duncan]

Bravo Bob!

Well, here's my postcard...
So you're saying (I think) that bringing a battery into series resonance will serve to excite the ambient (telluric) electrostatic environment so that the series resonant battery becomes a kind of conduit for cohering and transforming this (telluric) energy and making it available for regular electrical use?

I like it.... a lot!
Bob

http://www.energeticforum.com/images...s/thumbsup.gif
If I wanted to try and explain in as few words as I could -- that would be them you have grasped the mettle

[Duncan]

finger trouble ... sorry Randy corrected now although not fully thought out the Royer is a zero voltage switch ... so of course it must track resonance.
to then combine (if possible) well you see the line I'm thinking along

[tachyoncatcher]

Link

I have obviously been mulling this over for some time and suggest a combination the "capacitive charger"
and the Mazilli
C:\Users\user\Documents\Gauge Boson ...gh Voltage.htm
could answer .... there's obviously huge "shock" and "explosion" hazards with what I see here but I guess "t'was ever so" anyway I guess a little time for you guys to catch up and digest this prospect and offer suggestions,

Duncan, As hard as I tried, I just can't get that link to your hard drive to work! Could you resubmit that link?
Thanks Buddy!
Randy