Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2019 ENERGY CONFERENCE - ONLY 150 118 99 76 SEATS AVAILABLE!

2019 Energy Science & Technology Conference
Get your tickets now: http://energyscienceconference.com

Go Back   Energetic Forum > >

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.


Thread Tools
Old 03-13-2019, 03:12 PM
Turion's Avatar
Turion Turion is offline
Platinum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,676
A word of caution

On my original rotor I had a half inch thick piece of Delrin with 1/4 inch magnets on each side with just a bit of rotor material in between them. This means the magnets stuck out a bit on each side. Not far, but they still stuck out. Because of the close tolerances of my machine, one or more of those magnets came around and hit something at 3200 rpm and the rotor literally exploded. One magnet went right through the front of my computer and lodged inside where a couple members of this forum who were visiting found it. Another went through my keyboard and I am still finding pieces of keys from that. I am very lucky to still have all my teeth as one two inch magnet shot past my head. I still have holes in my ceiling and there are magnets I haven’t found yet. Possibly they are up in the attic.

I went to thicker magnets and a thicker rotor and now NO part of the magnet extends beyond the surface of the rotor. But needless to say, I am now a little gun shy about even running that machine. I have definitely increased safety measures including boxing it in so nothing flies out.

So be SAFE. No persuit of knowledge is worth your life!
"I aim to misbehave" Malcolm Reynolds
"Try Not! Do or do not. There is no 'Try' ". Yoda
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

Old 03-13-2019, 06:03 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,915
battery hookup details

Originally Posted by Mario View Post
Hi Aaron,

thanks for the details and pics. If I understand it correctly he had 48Ah on the front and a total of 96 Ah in the back, half of which (the 48 Ah tractor batt) he kept swapping with the front. If he was running the front at the C20 rate, the input should have been in the 2.4A range.
Do you know at how many amps he was running it? I'm just trying to get the relations of the system.

I have a few hi amp, fast switching mosfets that are 7 milliohms each, do you think 2 or 3 three in parallel could equal the mechanic switch?

I think it's interesting to look at these details, I mean, after all these were his advancements from his early 3 battery and Tesla switch systems, right?

Would be nice to have a similar setup with the machine running at the C20 of the input battery and get a battery bank, double the size of the first, charged up. Even better would be to have the input also at 96 Ah, but still run the machine at a C20 of a 48 Ah battery. You would end up with a machine where you simply swap the two batteries, but half of the input battery (equal to 48 Ah of 96) runs a load...constantly...

Dave, I don't want to distract from your setup so just shout if you think it's not in line with the thread topic.



No, on the front was a single garden starter battery - those things are ballpark around maybe 12ah. Being starter batteries, they of course don't have an amp hour rating, but ballpark can divide the CCA by 10 and that will give a ballpark. But over all the time using those things, they seem to be around a 12ah just from experience. That was the only thing on the front.

On the back, it was the 4 x 12v strings of those Korean war batteries that were constants. Those were ballpark around 12ah each for 48ah + another garden starter battery on the back at 12ah for 60ah total.

12 on front and 60 on back.

Korean war batteries stayed on the back and never got swapped. Just the garden starter batteries on front and back were swapped back and forth.

That's around 7-8 watts draw from the front battery at c20 but again a starter battery so the numbers don't exactly work out but close enough for ballpark estimates. The machine probably drew more. With one coil on either side of the rotor - I don't know. I'll measure the draw when I have time. A single coil SG with 7-8 power windings and a trigger draws around 20 watts ballpark. It's probably not too far from that for both coils on either side of the rotor.

There are ways to mimick the mechanical switch - Paul Babcock's switching circuit is probably the best ever designed, but no, use mechanical. There is something to the mechanical that allows for some extra radiant gains that I don't think can be had with solid state. If you have the Advanced SG book, the details on that switch are given.

Yes, the 3 battery / Tesla Switch type systems came way before this specific mechanical switch cap dump method I believe. I don't know if I'd look at it in terms of an evolution of what he was looking at - he just wanted to explore all methods possible.

We can dedicate another thread to this machine. I only brought it up because IF the constant batteries are something that can be used in the 3 battery system, even on the front end, it might be something that has benefit - I don't know.
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 11:38 AM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 420
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
We can dedicate another thread to this machine. I only brought it up because IF the constant batteries are something that can be used in the 3 battery system, even on the front end, it might be something that has benefit - I don't know.
Aaron, I created a thread here:

Bedini's cap pulser

Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2019, 06:37 PM
mobigozer mobigozer is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 8
Send a message via Skype™ to mobigozer

Originally Posted by Aaron View Post

Both of you appear to either be willfully ignorant or are simply dedicated to spreading propaganda against that which is true.

Let's take Jim Murray's SERPS example - besides the COP 50.0 demo shown at my conference, it was done in a way that cannot be disputed. With a measured amount of gasoline on a gasoline/generator set, it powered 1000-1500 watts of bulbs yet it ran just as long as it did if it was idling with no load at all. How?

If you can muster all the focus and mind power at your disposal to see a tiny little concept, you just may comprehend something that flushes all your nonsensical beliefs down the drain.

As the electricity from the generator leaves and powers a resistive load, the load of bulbs or heating elements are powered to create heat or light or both - then what remains is captured on the back side of the load in capacitors and is then sent back through the load powering the load twice with the same electricity and that electricity is stepped up in voltage as it is delivered back to the generator. What does that do???

The first thing to get through your heads is the fact that electricity is not "consumed" when it powers the load - otherwise, there is nothing to capture in the capacitors on the backside of the load and we know there is. Even conventional science has demonstrated that fact . I posted an article on that peer-reviewed paper quite a while back.

With the SERPS - the circuit turns the generator into a motor with the stepped up voltage causing it to unload the motor so every other quarter of the AC sinewave, the motor has a load and every other cycle the motor is motored by the generator negating the load. So if the generator is generating 50% of the time and is motoring 50% of the time, there is no net load on the generator while 1000-15000 watts of bulbs are being lit up - yet, the motor is idling that is turning the generator. That is one of many methods of unloading a generator so that it can produce electricity so the prime mover doesn't see the load. Turion shared another.

What other ways can we negate the load that the prime mover sees when it turns a generator that is powering something? With SERPS, it over-voltages the generator so that it is a periodic motor, which in turn unloads the motor turning it. It takes but only a bit of common sense to understand that concept. It's not theoretical - it works in spite of your beliefs in the conservation of energy, etc.

The conservation of energy concept is a distraction for fools as it has no relation to reality. When work is done in an electrical, chemical, mechanical or other system, 100% of the potential that was used to do work is dissipated back into the environment. NOTHING is conserved. The only thing that happened in a cyclic system such as the 3 battery system with a PULSED motor is that a NEW potential difference is created for fresh new potential to enter to do more work. NONE of the new work was done by anything that was erroneously believed to be conserved, it was done by establishing a new potential difference or dipole so that NEW, FRESH potential comes into the system to do more work.

The idea of conservation of energy is nothing more than a brainwashing mechanism to distract people from understanding there is infinite potential available at any two points of potential difference form the aether. A belief in conservation of energy makes the reality of infinite available potential unnecessary and that is the only purpose it serves - a subversive, propaganda tool so nobody ever sees that you don't have to conserve anything when there is potential available at any two points of charge separation that is freely available from space itself.

If you lift an object, you are NOT storing any potential in the object at a certain height. 100% of everything you used to lift the object is dissipated back to the ambient background environment at the peak of the lift. You CANNOT store anything you just used up!!! You only created a new potential difference between the object and another point of reference - the ground for example. It is said that you get out of it what you put in - that is just ignorance. What you get out of the lift of an object is the lift of the object in and of itself - what work is done afterward is SEPARATE from what you expended to lift it!!

MGH (mass x gravity x height) does NOT tell you how much potential energy is stored in the object. MGH only tells you how much potential energy that the dynamic and moving downward flowing non-static gravitational potential will be realized when the object can be released to fall to the ground. Then when it hits, it will be equal to the work used to lift it. You put in 1 part then external non-conserved FRESH NEW gravitational potential supplies the input to do an equivalent amount of work. You put in 1, gravity puts in 1 so you have 2 units of work that are measurable with 2nd grade mathematics and 7th grade equations that shows a 200% gain in total work input to the system. Why?

Because there is no such thing as conservation of energy. It doesn't exist, never has, doesn't and never will. In EVERY cyclic system, energy is dissipated on one cycle and 100% is dissipated back to the environment and a NEW potential difference is established. Then NEW, FRESH potential enters because of the NEW potential difference to do more work. NONE of that work in the 2nd cycle comes from the original input - meaning, nothing was conserved.

Newton's Cradle is the perfect example of violating conservation of energy and conservation of momentum. You lift one ball on one end and let go, it hits with a certain amount of loss - the remainder lifts the ball on the other end and that is where your input energy is 100% terminated and where the momentum from your input is 100% terminated as well! All you did was establish a NEW potential difference so that gravity comes in, pushes on the ball down and it hits another ball with some loss and the other end a ball goes up where 100% of that energy and momentum is 100% extinguished! No conservation of momentum or energy is demonstrated - it is the exact opposite!!!

That does't mean automatically that Newton's Cradle is a free energy device - instead, what it does mean and what it clearly demonstrates for those who have eyes to see is that there is no conservation of energy or momentum and on EACH CYCLE, NEW potential enters to do more work meaning that conservation principles are not only unnecessary but are completely ludicrous. It only serves to hide the FACT that free, unlimited potential is available at any point and it can be tapped at any two points of potential difference to do work.

The work done in a cyclic system after the initial input is related to our input, but is NOT directly proportional to it so the output can absolutely exceed the input. Anyone that says otherwise is a liar, con and ignoramus. RELATED BUT NOT DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL!!!
Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 03:16 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 173

Hi Turion,

I'm casting some cores for testing and I recall you saying you have obtained the ferrite for your own cores.

I have a source for inexpensive high grade iron powder here in the US but am having difficulty finding the ferrite powder.

Can you help a fellow out and point me in the right direction please?

Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 07:41 PM
Turion's Avatar
Turion Turion is offline
Platinum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,676

Matt sent me some for testing that he has a source for.

I found some on Amazon

I haven't tested EITHER one yet.
"I aim to misbehave" Malcolm Reynolds
"Try Not! Do or do not. There is no 'Try' ". Yoda
Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2019, 05:30 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 173
Thanks for the link.

So far, the companies that manufacture soft ferrites seem unwilling to sell to individuals in small quantities.

I had looked at this Fe304 earlier and discarded it as a candidate because itís magnetite.

Maybe it deserves a closer look. Perhaps when itís mixed with a resin and cast, the particles will be electrically insulated and behave like a soft ferrite?

Itís worth a try, the cost is certainly low enough.

Thanks again
Reply With Quote

save, system, generating, battery

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers