> > > > I saw Peter's first prototype on my first visit and was there when he was filming this latest film. Looks interesting. I like the monopole better but I have not replicated this yet (got started on it last year but never finished). This is one way to relatively easily replace the fuel heads on combustion engines with electric solinoid heads. And this solves the major problem with the degenerating batteries in the new hybrids...
> > > >
> > > > Rick
> > Aaron,
> >
> > I have watched the new DVD now and have not found it convincing. I don't have time to do a review of this long video.
> >
> > Number one concern: Bob Teal's motor did not have recovery. The motor shown was not Teal's recovery but Bedini's. Teal's was fundamentally different than Bedini's in this point, also that one is electromagnet and the other is permanent magnet. The capacitor WITH resitor does not hold the juice because it is a resistor, nothing is shown to support the suggestion that this is anything more than to help reduce the arcing on the contacts. So there is nothing really important with
> > Teal, unless there is some minor benefits with the kind of solinoid arangements.
> >
> > I do not feel that BEMF and charging of batteries with these kind of setups is covered sufficiently or even correctly. The video starts off with conventional theory in this matter and it is hard to follow where or if he departs from that. How can conventional theory explain the charging of batteries in Bedini's recovery system? This is fundamental.
> >
> > We do not see Teal's setup run, nor it's efficiency to be able to judge Peter's claims in this respect. However, the one shown is presented in a way that appears as if it is Teal's motor. I have seen this run in person and saw the circuit and it is not Teal's circuit (that is the motor shown running charging the battery). No testing of the torque is shown on this as on the conventional motors previously (besides a small generator powering a bulb very very shortly).
> >
> > I'm not going to comment on the Lindermann Rotary Attraction Motor because none is shown running.
> >
> > Everything about the DVD sounds conventional but the minor points relating to Bedini's recovery.
> >
> > All other statements relating to other inventors were not
> > demonstrated.
> >
> > Further, I do not see how the COP = 8.6 near the end of the video in his COP Analysis. I don't see several points explained or supported.
> >
> > At the very end he says "Motor designs that produce no back emf have been around for 170 years... These designs use a single electromagnet to attract a piece of iron and never use permenent magnets at all."
> > This is not correct and I wonder why this statement is made.
> Perhaps this is one of the several mistakes made in the editing.
> >
> > And what follows about Teal's system being so good was not established in the video.
> >
> > These are my thoughts about the video in the process of watching and finishing it.
> >
> > Rick Friedrich

rickfriedrich wrote:
>
> Aaron,
>
> Below is the quote from the website where you order the DVD. Notice that it says that Teal's "engine produced COPs between 8 and 10." In the video I don't see any supportive statement about this claim and I don't know if it even was claimed (from the video or reading the patents myself almost 2 years ago). Maybe Teal made that claim somewhere, I would like to know that. The only statment about COP = 8.6 in the video that I remember was in reference to some kind of calculations of a solinoid setup with Bedini recovery, where 85% was factored in as recovery, so this does not at all support any COP greater than 1 with Teal. Again, without the Bedini process I don't see what is significant about all this. However, if the collapsing field pushes the rod away (while the swtich is disconnected) then I suppose you do have some additive nature in torque benefits, but the cap with resistor would seem to prevent that. Nothing is shown in the video about this because Bedini's circuit was used instead.
>
> Here is the quote:
> Free Energy - Electric Motor Secrets, Bob Teal | Magnipulsion, Edwin Gray, Nikola Tesla, and other books & videos by Dr Peter Lindemann <http://free-energy.ws/products.html>
> "Electric Motor Secrets by Peter A. Lindemann, D.Sc.
> Laying dormant within the modern electric motor is a deep, dark secret. For the last 176 years, that secret has held the electric motor to its present level of performance. But in 1975, a quantum leap in electric motor design was made by an American inventor named Bob Teal. Teal's Magnipulsion Engine produced COPs between 8 and 10.
> Using lab demonstrations, patents, diagrams, and private documents, Dr. Lindemann takes you on a trip through the history of electric motors, resurrecting the secret of Magnipulsion, and revealing the future of electric motor design. (2 hrs 30 minutes)"
>
> Here is another quote of interest:
> Free Energy, Bob Teal | Magnipulsion, Dr Peter Lindemann
> <http://www.free-energy.ws/bob-teal.html>
> "After retirement in 1972, Bob and Beatrice moved from Honolulu to Madison, Florida. Like many creative people, "retirement" didn't agree with him. With nothing else to do, he decided to build a model of the sci-fi engine he had invented for his novel. It worked! The Magnipulsion Engine produced large amounts of mechanical energy while running on small pulses of DC current to its electro-magnetic coils.
> In addition, when the power coils were turned off, the circuitry could also recapture most of this input electricity from the collapsing magnetic fields to recharge his batteries or run other loads. It was a quantum leap in electric motor design."
>
> I don't see how the circuit would give this much mechanical, I did not see large amounts of mechanical, nor could the setup as shown in the video recapture really any of the input. The only capture was due to Bedini's recovery system placed on Peter's motor.
> Now, I just saw the short video advertisement for Peter's video and it certainly claims to use the BEMF, and it shows it supposedly running bulbs with no hinderance to the motor opperation. But this does not result from what is shown in the patents or what Peter showed of Teal's system. You would have to modify this the right way.
> What I do see is that Teal's system as shown may prevent the destructive BEMF from flowing back, by flowing into the cap while the resistor right away drains the cap but not recharging the battery. So the hindering of the BEMF makes it more efficient, but it is not captured to any use as shown. You would have to gate it out of the system the right way to be used, as John has done. If he did do that it is not shown.
>
> In this short clip at the end we read: "Dr. Linderman takes you on a trip through the history of electric motors, resurrecting the secret of Magnipulsion, and revealing the future of electric motor design.
> You will learn how Bob Teal exceeded 1.0 COP with his Magnipulsion motors. For the first time in history, all his secrets will be revealed."
>
> But this is the very thing that is not shown. We do not see a Teal motor running in the new video.
>
> Further, the news article listed mentions that the setup had magnets. But the new video says it only used electromagnets and no magnets. Further quote "A small magnipulsion engine could operate a home cnetral air conditioner for about 50 cents per day." This was in the seventies. 50 cents today would give you 5kwh, and back then much more. So this is not a full recovery setup, and if this was true it does not seem as powerful as made out in the video. Maybe I am missing something here.
>
> Finally, reading the brochure by Magneteal Industries Inc., I see no statement of its efficiencies or COP, so I don't know where these figures come from other than the Bedini modification. The paper has several questions asking this very kind of thing and all that is mentioned is that it is but a fraction of what is used in conventional systems, or that it would cost pennies a day. $0.50 a day for central air in the 1970's. Anyway, I would be curious to see any specific claims or specific circuits that show recovery.
>
> Rick

Russel Prier <russelp@clear.net.nz> wrote:
Hi Rick,
Dont forget a wirewound resistor is also an inductor I know of one person in the US who achieved COP of 8 by pulsing a resistor in the right way and at the right frequency.