No announcement yet.

Bedini style generator for peer review cop10-plus

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bedini style generator for peer review cop10-plus

    mirror topic of open source project
    from Julian Perry UK

    Hi all,

    For the last three years, I have been working to obtain unequivocal evidence that a Bedini-style generator can harvest energy from the local environment. In particular, as someone who trained and worked as a scientist and a science teacher in the UK and is now retired, my aim is to present clear evidence of the harvesting phenomenon and to publish that data in a suitable scientific journal. So far I have found nothing in the mainstream literature addressing this specific topic, probably in part for fear of ridicule.

    To this end, I have built a ‘Pulsed Flyback Generator’ and spent a large part of this year testing it with regard to a range of variables that can affect its performance. Up to this point, I have focused on measuring its CoP and finding out the optimum settings for best-charging performance.

    The testing is not complete in that I have yet to undertake power tests that bring any hidden factors to bear, and these tests will add further weight and confirmation to the CoP data already obtained.

    My aim in all this is not to bring some form of generator to market but rather, as a ‘curiosity-driven’ project, to show the scientific community clear evidence that energy can be extracted from the ‘environment’ by an open electronic system. Particularly for many electrical engineers, an open system does not compute and the notion of using the term CoP outside of heat transfer is anathema.

    What good data there is has usually been kept within the walls of interested groups and forums like this. However, with my aged links to the ‘establishment’ and universities, my long-term aim is to get further replication done and add weight to the issue of open systems and energy extraction from the quantum vacuum, what Tesla and others have referred to as radiant energy.

    My project does not directly examine where the energy comes from and the mechanisms involved (such as vacuum biasing) but it is of course natural to speculate. In my view, the only viable source of the energy gain is the quantum vacuum and I’m in contact with Tom Valone and others in the US on that aspect. It will probably require a specially designed experimental setup to investigate that hypothesis but in the meantime, my own view is that the theories of Ilya Prigogine on ‘far from equilibrium’ states and negative entropy as well as the Geometrodynamics of John Wheeler are relevant in this phenomenon.

    I plan to write the scientific paper at the start of the new year largely based on the power tests that are soon to start. Due to the much better than expected performance, I need to upgrade the PCB, and in particular the relays, to cope with currents up to 20A instead of the 3A originally designed for. Meanwhile, I have written various documents presenting the evidence so far and, while I am keen not to risk interfering with the evidence related to the forthcoming paper, I am happy to provide a link to one interim report (not written in scientific paper format) showing the methodology, equipment and evidence of some of the CoP values obtained so far. This might provide some inspiration to others who are embarking on this journey.

    If there is one overarching finding I would state after all my work then it is this: one needs to optimize all the factors based on the unique properties of a specific build. The factors so far tested include PWM PRF and duty cycle, coil voltage (i.e. number of batteries in series), battery capacity and chemistry, charging point on the charging profile, and the battery swap interval.

    With my build designed to allow for the testing of all these variables, when these are optimized, then I have now reached CoPs of more than 10 (compared to around 2-3 when not optimized) using HV pulses of a little over 1kV applied directly to the battery. When towards the end of this year I get to increase the peak HV towards 2kV (by changing some active components) the results are likely to increase significantly. These values translate to power levels of 100-200W which is a modest output but scientifically speaking highly significant.

    Since the pdf file is 9MB and can't be attached to this post, here is a link to my Mega account and one document that I’m happy to share at this time. Others will follow as and when my paper is published next year.

    I’m not going to distract myself with too much discussion here about it as I’m rather busy but I will respond to some significant points or feedback. I felt prompted to present this now as we head into a difficult winter for many, not least for reasons of energy availability!


    If you want to Change the world
    BE that change !!

  • #2
    File link no longer available.


    • #3
      there was an issue which was mentioned by Julian

      quote post 17 below

      My original link is being ‘neutralised’ by the system so I will attach the doc directly here as it’s under 15MB.

      I should have my ‘suggestions’ doc ready today (uk time).

      A quick comment about ‘looping’. Yes looping the output back to the input is a good way of seeing if a device is indeed harvesting energy (from wherever). Using the two battery system this is actually what is being done in my system but with a delay equal to the swap time. This is all explained in the other doc ‘Load Testing’ where I layout my methodology for doing power tests, guided by the CoP results so far.

      For those who haven’t read from the beginning, using the cap dump circuit I was getting CoPs in the 0.8-1.5 range whereas using direct HV pulsing I was getting much better in the 5-15 range (more recent readings). I need to confirm these with the forthcoming power tests and with an appropriate ’level of confidence’.

      I repeat that my overall aim is to confirm or refute a phenomenon and not to identify any particular energy pathway.

      Anyway here are the two main docs I’m sharing at this time. Another will come later today.

      Interim Report (Forum).pdf (9383.62 kB - downloaded 58 times.)
      Load Testing.pdf (494.94 kB - downloaded 75 times.)

      quote post # 18 below
      Ok, so here as promised I attach a document with my suggestions as to how to improve on, or obtain, a CoP>1 with a pulsed flyback type of generator. It is based on my practical experience from the last 3 years in particular and I hope it will give some inspiration to those who might be stuck with how to move forward.

      As using links in posts on here seems to be a bit problematic, there is a link at the end of the attached doc that will take you to a set of folders on my Mega account. There are all the files I have uploaded so far and a lot more. This is all I am willing to share at this time but it should serve the aforementioned purpose.

      I expect my next contribution will be some data from increasing the peak spike voltage using other active components and some highlights from the power test data in the spring and of course, any paper I get published as and when that happens.

      As I have a lot to get on with, I won’t be contributing regularly to the forum. A bit like a flyback pulse, I have injected a lot of energy in a short space of time and now need to move back while it does whatever it does

      I expect I will look in every so often and address any major points but otherwise, keep on with your own unique journeys of discovery and hold to the belief that there is a much bigger world out there than we, as a society, have yet been able, or willing, to reveal.

      Suggestions for an effective generator.pdf (145.04 kB - downloaded 112 times.)

      End quote

      thanks for looking
      I have placed a link back to this topic at Julian’s thread at
      Chet K
      If you want to Change the world
      BE that change !!