Basic Free Energy Device

[Wistiti]

Quick step in to also comfirm that I see many time, with my experiment, that the 3bgs share by Dave and Matt, extend the run time of a load compare of using the same 3 batt //. As said use big batt and preferably a dcdc converter.

[citfta]

Hello Luc,

I don't know why more people are not speaking up. I have been very busy the last few days and just haven't had time to post a response to the latest comments. As I have explained before I have done many of the same tests as Dave and have gotten good results. By good results I mean that I have seen loads run much longer using the 3 battery generating system than they have run using the same batteries in parallel. This to me proves there is something about being able to recycle the energy that DOES work. I have also taken the time to rewind some motors according to Matt's design to make the motor a pulse type motor. I have seen when that motor is used it extends the run time even more just like Dave and Matt have said. I have also built and contributed to this forum a design for an automated battery cycling system that helps to keep all batteries rotated through the various positions of the 3BGS.

As Dave has said, how you set up the system makes all the difference in the world in whether you get good results or bad results. To get any results worth considering you MUST use large enough batteries. At a minimum for small test purposes I would not use anything smaller than the lawn and garden tractor type battery called U1 at Walmart. You can get them for sometimes $19.95 on sale and around here usually for $29.95. And you have to keep the load small for the smaller batteries.

And yes I do know you can't judge what is going on in a battery just by looking at the voltage. That is why Dave and I and I think also Matt have bought and use battery analyzers. These tell us the internal resistance and actual capacitance of the battery.

I do know at least one other person that I have actually visited that has done some amazing things using the 3BGS and large deep cycle batteries. He has gone completely off grid and until recently lived in the middle of Tennessee with only solar cells as his source of electricity.

The only claim that Dave has made that I have not had time to verify is his design of coils that speed up under load. My life has been very hectic for the last year and a half with the illness and passing of my father and then the time my brothers and I have had to spend cleaning out all his collection of stuff from over 70 years of living in the same place. When we get all that settled I will certainly be working on Dave's coil design and testing it.

One last thing I will say. Dave has said he has a way of overcoming the drag from the magnets attraction to the core of the coils. He has shared that with me and I can say for certain that it does work. Dave is holding on to that idea and that idea alone in hopes of getting a patent on it to try and recover some of the vast amount of money he has spent over the last several years of his research. As you well know wire and magnets and having rotors machined and all the other things involved in research cost a lot of money. I don't understand why anyone would begrudge Dave a chance to recover some of what he has spent when he has been so generous with all that he has shared. And I don't understand why more people have not taken the time and a little effort to try some of the things he has shared. I know of only 4 of us that have actually built and properly tested the 3BGS with a Matt designed pulse motor. I sincerely hope there are more that just haven't spoken up.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[Turion]

Conclusion

Not a problem. We each have to find our own way. You have your correct path and I have mine.

[gotoluc]

Well ron48, giving advice is one thing. Demonstrating the advice to work is another.
Somehow I feel you have nothing to demonstrate but ready to advise?

Like I said, I've followed this topic over the years. Many have built, tested and shared their results. However, you cannot find one single post that shows an overall gain let alone similar or consistent results.
If I would of seen such a post I would of replicated to confirm.
Also, doesn't it look kind of odd that not even one of the 20 or more replicators would step forward at this point to show their results?

Sorry Dave, I'm not trying to do a character assassination here. I'm looking for positive results from just one replicator and can't find any.

Regards

Luc

[ron48]

Well gotoluc do now a proper test with daves guidance. Then their will be no doubt in anyones mind

[Turion]

Luc,
In your video you stated it was to investigate claims "SOME Experimenters" are making about running a motor and charging batteries at the same time. THAT is why I brought this to your attention. Matt and I were doing that long before Rick ever dreamed of doing it.

Can I prove you are wrong in what you showed in your video? Heavens NO! That system was a failure before you connected the wires together to start it. So no, there is no way I could prove that what YOU built would work. Everything you show in that video is correct EXCEPT your statement that you cannot make gains when running a motor between two batteries in series and two batteries in parallel. You give us a perfect example of what NOT to do when putting together the system we have been discussing. It reminds me of when Myth Busters built the Bedini machine. LOL

First, according to YOUR words on the video, you used 5 amp hour batteries. We have stated MANY times that you must use large (amp hour) deep cycle batteries because the impedance in small batteries will KILL any chance of getting it to work.

Second, the motor you are using is drawing (according to the video) 2.85 amps from a pair of 5 amp hour batteries. We have said time and time again that the load cannot exceed the C20 rate of the batteries. That's like drilling a two inch hole in a gallon jug of water and trying to keep it from going empty by filling it with a teaspoon. The C-20 rate on those batteries is probably around .25 amps. Your load ALONE prevents it from working.

Third, that is NOT Matt's pulse motor. That motor is designed to NOT output the coil collapse OR the generated power of the motor to fight against the input. That means when run between the positives there is no charge PULSE hitting battery three. No collapse of the motor coil, no spike. All you have is voltage to charge battery 3.

Fourth, I will cut and paste what Matt said when you posted your videos on YouTube: "You probably need to regulate the potential difference to higher voltage ensuring the bottom 2 batteries are receiving enough of a charge to actually go into a charge state. All your doing now is hitting them with a trickle charge. Test the power delivery of a trickle charger. The other option is to regulate the power coming out of the motor to ensure the same thing. Its kind of amazing that you of all people start with a test that is set to fail. There are rules for both sides of the assembly that are conventional but still applicable. Discharge and charge rates are real and you have to hit them for the battery to respond. Don't just assume the batteries know what to do."

Finally, to see anything you have to go back and forth, moving each par of batteries from the top to the bottom OR you must send energy from the bottom two batteries back to the top.

If you choose to do a REAL test of this system, I would be happy to help you make sure it is successful. But no, you want me to prove it works before you try it. Good luck with that.

[Turion]

My thoughts

Matt is correct. I do NOT know how to do the proper measurements. In fact, when I fist started posting about this stuff on the OU forum they ran me off because I didn’t know how to defend myself and they kept insisting I “prove” that this is for real. So I quit. I put it all on the shelf. I moved on, figuring I would have nothing to do with this crap EVER again. Then that damn Luther Goodman contacted me and told me he was seeing what I was seeing and the circus started up again. I tried different motors connected to all kinds of different loads. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn’t. Then Matt introduced the pulse motor and the instances of it working became more frequent. But because I had been run off and because I let “experts” convince me I wasn’t seeing what I really WAS seeing, I needed something to prove this to myself. The motor runs st different speed when run between the positives than it does normally, and I looked for quite a while for a method of proving TO MYSELF that this is for real. So here is what I did. I charged up my best set of four batteries and put all four in parallel. Then I took one of my Matt modified motors and connected it to a water pump I got that had its own motor, which I removed and shaft connected to the Matt motor. This was an RV pump of some kind and also had a meter that could be reset. Then I pumped as much water from one five gallon bucket to another and back as the four batteries would pump until the pump no longer had enough power to pump anything. Then I recharged the batteries and did it a second time. I would have done it a third time but the results were pretty much the same and watching water pump is kinda like watching paint dry. Then I recharged the batteries, put two in series and two in parallel and ran the same test. I was able to pump over two and a half times as much water as the BEST result I got running straight off the batteries. Yes the pump ran slower and at the end when I was switching back and forth more often it ran really slow and it was extremely tedious, but work is work. There is no substitute. I didn’t run the test a second time. But from that moment on, NO ONE has any hope of EVER convincing me this does not work. And that test was done early on. We have made improvements since then. So you guys can rattle off all the expert opinions and reasons this can’t work all you want to. I have seen what I have seen. I owe you absolutely NOTHING and if you choose NOT to experiment with this, it is your loss. But don’t come whining around that I don’t share.

[Matthew Jones]

Dear Matt,

Glad you dropped in.

It wouldn't of been wise to mention a persons name in the video. However, if you look at the date it was published it coincides to be around the time a certain person was publishing long videos and making those claims.

I may be wrong and my ego would have no problem admitting it

All I ask is to be proven wrong. If you or anyone can do that I'll be more than happy to admit publicly that I was wrong.
I'll also be happy to take down the videos and make new ones to demonstrate the correct build and results.

Are you or anyone up to the task?

Regards

Luc

I told you the right way to measure those systems. You have to know the expected conventional loss of your load and the efficiency of your battery under conventional charging (Pulsed or otherwise) to assume what is hitting the battery. And as proven by several people those number will be low. I do not have any intention of documenting anything beyond that, I do not share anything anymore. What I have is mine and it will stay that way until I decide otherwise. Your letting yourself down if you believe what you said.
I'm going to leave again. Have fun arguing with the other people.

Matt

[gotoluc]

Dear Matt,

Glad you dropped in.

It wouldn't of been wise to mention a persons name in the video. However, if you look at the date it was published it coincides to be around the time a certain person was publishing long videos and making those claims.

I may be wrong and my ego would have no problem admitting it

All I ask is to be proven wrong. If you or anyone can do that I'll be more than happy to admit publicly that I was wrong.
I'll also be happy to take down the videos and make new ones to demonstrate the correct build and results.

Are you or anyone up to the task?

Regards

Luc

[Allen Burgess]

Deep cycle batteries.

But you made a blanket statement clearly in that video and people listen to you. You DID NOT say in the video this was referring ONLY to the thief, liar and hypocrite idiot Rick, what ever his last name is, You said ANYBODY who measures this system any other way than way I am measuring it is measuring wrong. But you were wrong.
This was explained and your only retraction was, If I am wrong prove me wrong. F*ck You, your wrong, is the only reaction I can think of that suits this brick wall type superiority thinking. And you were wrong when you said it and you still haven't done any thing to see if I was right. Prove you have done more.
You cannot know what is hitting the third battery and the only math to show you is a known load and known third battery. You have to test the system by hand and chart it.
You cannot make a blanket statement and hope people understand you are enthused about one or the other.
David/Turion can not have this argument with you because he does not know how to measure much and he does not know how the 3 battery system works.
I DO!! and what I told you was the truth. Ignore me if you chose too, maybe it hurts your ego, maybe it pisses you off but what I told you is the truth.

And BRO MIKEY you should shut the f*ck up and go away so real researches can come back here and work on problems, including their arguments with each other. You are a pestilence.

@Matthew Jones,

Both you and Turion should know that deep cycle batteries are designed to self charge chemically and that stimulation from pulse motors can trigger it. This kind of power has nothing to do with any over unity feature from your alternator.

Furthermore; Lay off BRO MIKEY you stinking rat!

[Matthew Jones]

The video you keep referring to was not related to your work. Don't know why you keep bringing it up or why you or Matt were so offended by it. Please point out anything in the video that refers it to your work.

But you made a blanket statement clearly in that video and people listen to you. You DID NOT say in the video this was referring ONLY to the thief, liar and hypocrite idiot Rick, what ever his last name is, You said ANYBODY who measures this system any other way than way I am measuring it is measuring wrong. But you were wrong.
This was explained and your only retraction was, If I am wrong prove me wrong. F*ck You, your wrong, is the only reaction I can think of that suits this brick wall type superiority thinking. And you were wrong when you said it and you still haven't done any thing to see if I was right. Prove you have done more.
You cannot know what is hitting the third battery and the only math to show you is a known load and known third battery. You have to test the system by hand and chart it.
You cannot make a blanket statement and hope people understand you are enthused about one or the other.
David/Turion can not have this argument with you because he does not know how to measure much and he does not know how the 3 battery system works.
I DO!! and what I told you was the truth. Ignore me if you chose too, maybe it hurts your ego, maybe it pisses you off but what I told you is the truth.

And BRO MIKEY you should shut the f*ck up and go away so real researches can come back here and work on problems, including their arguments with each other. You are a pestilence.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi all, sounds like good pondering to me turion.
Sounds like your almost going down this train of thought, from magluvin.
Exploring Resonance And Efficiency Of Speakers And Subwoofers
Add more coil/cores to generator or motor and we get possibly more work out for similar input.
And if we reduce some of the usual things holding us back, like attraction to core, then things look even better.
Just throwing a couple cents in the pond, carry on.
peace love light

[Turion]

Jim,
I am probably the least qualified person on this forum to answer your question and I mean that sincerely. What I know I know from what I have seen on my bench, so I am going to throw a bunch of crap against the wall and you can scrape off what you don’t like. These are the things I think about at night. We know electricity and magnetism are related. We talk about magnetic fields and electromagnetic fields, and electrical fields.

When a coil collapses, there is a spike. When a coil with an iron core collapses, is the spike larger? If there is a change in the spike...Is this change in the collapse spike because more electricity was put into the coil? No. It was because the core created a stronger magnetic field.

When John puts an iron core in the ZFM, it creates a stronger magnetic field for the same amount of input voltage. Because not as many amps are needed to drive the motor at the speed it is rotating, the amp draw immediately drops. When the coil collapses, this stronger magnetic field collapses creating a larger spike. Run a small magnet on a rotor past a coil and look at the scope of the coil collapse. Now run a larger magnet past the coil and watch the coil collapse. It is the collapse of the magnetic field, not the electrical field that produces the spike.

So here is what I think about late at night. For every action there is a reaction. If the magnetic field collapse produces a positive electrical spike (remember the magnet going past the coil?...that was a positive spike) maybe it is the collapse of the ELECTRICAL field that causes the “negative” energy spike. If not, what reaction DOES the collapse of the electrical field cause.

I know this is all babble and someone will show up and prove me wrong,?but this is what I am good at. Being wrong 99% of the time.

[gotoluc]

Luc,
When you say you have followed what we have been sharing and then post a video that discredits our work using batteries we have said a thousand times will NOT work, what am I supposed to think, other than that you are NOT just a skeptic, which is COMPLETELY understandable, but a disinformation specialist?

The video you keep referring to was not related to your work. Don't know why you keep bringing it up or why you or Mat were so offended by it. Please point out anything in the video that refers it to your work.
If you can't find anything referring it to your work then stop using it to discredit me as it's not about what you guys shared.

If I post a video today of a system with four batteries running 600 watts of load between the positives, what does that prove? NOTHING! Any idiot can hook that system up and run it. And it will run for a while, even when hooked up INVORRECTLY, before there are significant losses enough to prove it doesn’t work. So how do you prove it works? You let it run for a month and THEN measure the batteries. How do I put THAT in a 3 minute video.

It's unrealistic to think a 3 minute video would prove anything. However, if you explain the devices main components, power source and what it can achieve in a said time then maybe it can be done in a 20 to 30 minute video without revealing your secret.

I do not care whether you believe me or not. I do not care whether you build this or not. What I object to is someone saying this doesn’t work when they have made no REAL attempt to actually replicate what we have shared.

Again, please post a reference where I say your device doesn't work.
If you can't which I know you can't then stop making false accusations.

I could name 20 people who have replicated it correctly and have seen that it works. At least to the extent that you get much longer runs than possible off the four batteries connected in parallel. I even know of a couple who figured out before I did what it takes to keep the third battery or batteries in that position charging faster than the primaries discharge, and for THAT I owe them.

I don't need 20 independent replications. Just 1 will do as long as the power calculations are done correctly.

Looking forward to it.

Regards

Luc

[Turion]

Luc,
When you say you have followed what we have been sharing and then post a video that discredits our work using batteries we have said a thousand times will NOT work, what am I supposed to think, other than that you are NOT just a skeptic, which is COMPLETELY understandable, but a disinformation specialist?

If I post a video today of a system with four batteries running 600 watts of load between the positives, what does that prove? NOTHING! Any idiot can hook that system up and run it. And it will run for a while, even when hooked up INVORRECTLY, before there are significant losses enough to prove it doesn’t work. So how do you prove it works? You let it run for a month and THEN measure the batteries. How do I put THAT in a 3 minute video.

I do not care whether you believe me or not. I do not care whether you build this or not. What I object to is someone saying this doesn’t work when they have made no REAL attempt to actually replicate what we have shared. I could name 20 people who have replicated it correctly and have seen that it works. At least to the extent that you get much longer runs than possible off the four batteries connected in parallel. I even know of a couple who figured out before I did what it takes to keep the third battery or batteries in that position charging faster than the primaries discharge, and for THAT I owe them.