Tom Bearden and Oil?

[Inquorate]

How do you define OU ?

Because in an exciter type arrangement the Led's that are being lighted remotely with no wire connection are external to the system and are being lighted by excited energy from the environment, they must be.

The energy that is exciting the Led's never actually go's into or out of the circuit doing the exciting.

We need to have a detailed explanation of how you define OU ? In my opinion an OU device needs to have extra energy actually come into and out of the device that is powered, this energy should be able to be stored or used directly. If extra the energy cannot be stored it is just highly excited energy.

If an exciter qualifies then I have one, but I cannot measure the energy required to light an LED remotely or a "neon" or several neons with no wire's, it may only take an increadibly small amount of power to actually light the LED or neon at HF.

How is it measured ?

Cheers

if i understand it correctly, the exciter circuit is a parametric oscillator, a variant of an lc tank circuit, that is oscillating at L3's spatial resonant frequency. The L3 coil hums at it's resonant interface with the environment, and a reversal of entropy occurs, where heat becomes electron movement. So the exciter is an energy pump.

Stiffler would kill me for giving that explanation, i'm sure it's way oversimplified, and doesn't even mention harmonics. Hope to check it out in much more depth as equipment becomes available.

@aaron, i'd forgotten milkovic oscillator, wasn't sure if ainslie resistor panned out. Thankyou for the reply. Will look into the others if time permits

[Aaron]

ainslie circuit

wasn't sure if ainslie resistor panned out.

Not to my satisfaction. Because as a heater, COP 17 would be
phenomenal but at only a couple, it isn't worth the time. This is because
a heat pump water heater is 3.0~5 cop and overseas I have seen claims
of 6-7 cop but don't know if those are true, they retrofit any water heater
and replace the resistive elements.

So at minimum, for 600 watts, they already produce as much heat as a
3000+ watt resistive element water heater so cop 2.0 can't even
compete - not by a long-shot.

The Ainslie circuit would have to beat COP 3~5+ just to be able to
compete with simple heat pump technology.

http://www.airgenerate.com/

That is the Air Tap - about cop 3.0, 3 times as much heat produced
as the electrical input but of course that is to be expected for heat
pumps.

[John_K]

My 2 cents

I told Jeff I wouldn't get involved in this thread, but I like a debate just as much as the next guy.

Firstly, kudos to Aaron for sticking up for what he believes in. His passion speaks very highly of his character.

A big thanks to Tom Bearden who opened my mind to a technology I didn't even know existed 5 years ago. Without his years of research and efforts to attempt to educate people and open their minds, I personally would still be in the dark.

Next goes thanks to John Bedini for turningTom's theories into reality and sharing them with the world. Without John's open source methodology and willingness to help me understand the basics and beyond, I'd be happily watching the TV on a Saturday night instead of spending yet another cold night in the shed - building, testing and learning.

Lastly, I'd like to thank Tony Craddock for helping to bring John Bedini's work to life in the form of DVD's. Without those DVD's I'd still be trying to get my first Monopole SSG to work, let alone achieving the results I've seen over the years.

In summary, I don't give a overweight rodent's backside who is paying who for what, to get the information out to give us a chance to change the world from the dogma that most people live by.

Personally, I have never believed that Tom or Tony are frauds and I still do not have a reason to change that belief. I could tell from the passion in Tom's voice from the mid 80s "Open Mind with Bill Jenkins" radio interviews that this man was for real. I still remember one of his lines "Don't believe me, just go and build it for yourself!" and an even better one "Don't tell me it doesn't work until you have done the experiments."

Well, I've done the experiments and I believe him! Enough said, back to the bench...


John K.

[anut]

Well, I've done the experiments and I believe him! Enough said, back to the bench...


John K.

Out of curiosity, may i ask if you (or any other forumists) have done any experiment that validates TB's EM equations?

About 10 years ago, he postulated the existence of so-called magical windows from which energy can be tapped. Do you (or any other forumists) have any experimental evidence that proves his conjecture?

[Aaron]

Open Mind with Bill Jenkins - Tom Bearden, John Bedini, and Free Energy

Personally, I have never believed that Tom or Tony are frauds and I still do not have a reason to change that belief. I could tell from the passion in Tom's voice from the mid 80s "Open Mind with Bill Jenkins" radio interviews that this man was for real. I still remember one of his lines "Don't believe me, just go and build it for yourself!" and an even better one "Don't tell me it doesn't work until you have done the experiments."

Thanks John!

I believe this is the whole interview -
YouTube - ‪Free Energy‬‏

Most places have it chopped up into many parts.

[Aaron]

calculations

I'll bite. What other devices that are proven >1 are part of the public record? How many of those have been replicated? I ask in genuine earnestness.

Are you interested enough to do some simple calculations right here
in this thread? It is very straightforward. I believe you are earnest in your
asking.

[Inquorate]

Are you interested enough to do some simple calculations right here
in this thread? It is very straightforward. I believe you are earnest in your
asking.

Ever since scraping thru 3 unit geometry and trigonometry and multiplying matrices in 3 unit calculus at school 16 years ago, my brain shuts off at the slightest hint of an equation.. give me mind experiments any day..

the bouncy ball example seems fine to me, as do your other examples..

As for Bearden, i've posted Bearden-esque explanations of Dr Stiffler's Lattice.. Although i'm becoming a believes in destroying the dipole to achieve any meaningful energy liberation. I posted the article because i simply believe in making informed decisions, and thought people's reactions would give me that information.

It's all good. I've got a lot on my plate at the moment but if you share, i'll read and study

[John_K]

Thanks John!

I believe this is the whole interview -
YouTube - ‪Free Energy‬‏

Most places have it chopped up into many parts.

Yes Aaron,

That's one of them. I have about 6-7 of the full programs. Thanks for posting the link. A lot of great information in those old Open Mind programs.


John K.

[qvision]

Obviously it's right to ask questions and it's proper to investigate the roots of organisations we want to be a part of.

I did the same tracking down for energeticforum.com and it's ultimate registrar is http://domainsbyproxy.com, who specialise in keeping website owners details hidden from the public ...

I did the same for Divert and the details are publically available.

I did the same for www.overunityresearch.com and the details are publically available.

I did the same for Free Energy and the details are publically available.

I did the same for Heretical Builders - Powered by vBulletin and the details are publically available.

I did the same for www.free-energy-info.co.uk and the details are publically available.

So far, it's only our website here that wants to maintain it's owners privacy and there's nothing wrong with that, is there ?

[EMCSQ]

Quote Aaron:
Anyone that
says it isn't over 1.0 because the ball doesn't bounce higher each time
is clueless as to what input joules compared to output joules means.
Anyone with any degree of honesty can do this experiment. It is over
1.0 cop by the 2nd to 3rd bounce.
Quote End

The bouncing ball is a oscillating system.
The max height of the ball is converted to Vmax when it hits the ground.
Then it is squeezed and a portion of its energy (of velocity) is converted into heat, and therefor the ball is not able to reach its initial height.
A lossless swinging system maintains its energy levels , but its a fault to add the energy levels each cycle , because each cycle the energy form is is converted from one form into another and not created!!!
Lack of fundamentals.

[Inquorate]

Quote Aaron:
Anyone that
says it isn't over 1.0 because the ball doesn't bounce higher each time
is clueless as to what input joules compared to output joules means.
Anyone with any degree of honesty can do this experiment. It is over
1.0 cop by the 2nd to 3rd bounce.
Quote End

The bouncing ball is a oscillating system.
The max height of the ball is converted to Vmax when it hits the ground.
Then it is squeezed and a portion of its energy (of velocity) is converted into heat, and therefor the ball is not able to reach its initial height.
A lossless swinging system maintains its energy levels , but its a fault to add the energy levels each cycle , because each cycle the energy form is is converted from one form into another and not created!!!
Lack of fundamentals.

to be fair, the idea has enough merit to investigate. See this video

YouTube - kinetic energy multiplier theory

gravity can theoretically milked for useable power, but the returns would be minimal; it's hard to efficiently collect the kinetic energy and so i haven't taken it beyond a thought experiment.

[Inquorate]

I must say that it's curious that this site's owners of all the sites listed are the only ones who felt the need to hide behind a proxy but i expect it is of no import to the real work being done here and elsewhere.

[qvision]

It's also the same for Energetic Science Ministries™ | Energetics.

I am always of the mind that transparency and openness are the best way to operate but whomever owns energetic and ESM may have good reason not to be either of these things.

[thedude]

It's also the same for .

I am always of the mind that transparency and openness are the best way to operate but whomever owns energetic and ESM may have good reason not to be either of these things.

Oh, oh...
kay... This is gonna get ugly i bet. Now the real debate is going to start and I want no part of it. I'll probably read and send out some positive vibes if possible. :P lol

Everyone stay cool.

[Joit]

Quote Aaron:
Anyone that
says it isn't over 1.0 because the ball doesn't bounce higher each time
is clueless as to what input joules compared to output joules means.
Anyone with any degree of honesty can do this experiment. It is over
1.0 cop by the 2nd to 3rd bounce.
Quote End

The bouncing ball is a oscillating system.
The max height of the ball is converted to Vmax when it hits the ground.
Then it is squeezed and a portion of its energy (of velocity) is converted into heat, and therefor the ball is not able to reach its initial height.
A lossless swinging system maintains its energy levels , but its a fault to add the energy levels each cycle , because each cycle the energy form is is converted from one form into another and not created!!!
Lack of fundamentals.

Take a Egg instead a jumping Ball and Energy is converted.
Take a jumping Ball and Energy is created.
Lack of Fundamentals? Yes, Yours.