Im sure something about my idea is flawed...i hope not, but you know that goes. I cant help but to think about the possibility of updating electrical generators, as i've heard there only 70% efficent at most(or close). anyway, are there any problems that stand out in this idea.


Basicly using V shaped electromagnets on the central pin(Rotater), arranged so the feilds facing the coil(to conduct electricity) switch from N to S repeatedly, Say 16 times, meaning 8 southpoles and 8 notrhpoles. The point being to balance the magnetic fields so that it repeals as much as it attracts, to balance the force to eliminate most of the friction. The friction being due to the conducting coil becoming magnetic as current flows through it and interacts with the central electromagnets, should be taking out of the picture in this setup, leaving the only loss in energy due to the central electromagnets heat loss, and the heat loss from using a fuel to spin it.

If my idea works, i could see somewhere around a 90% conversion of fuel to electricity. Is there anything that would suggest this would not work? im guessing it want for some reason....seems to be the way it goes for me.

if its not simple enough, basicaly its normal generator, normally the is only one electromagnet in the center spinning, mine would use an array of magnets(picture in a circle...fields pointing outward from center...N,S,N,S,N,S,N,S). To equal out the magnetic friction.

Do a video torrent search for John Bedini. He successfully made monopole electric motors that somehow collect radiant energy from the environment and stores it in batteries. In the end you have more usuable energy than what you put in. They still don't understand the physics yet but the "free" energy comes from the environment.

ehh...i looked, i didn't see anything but a possible scam. I could be wrong, but it just sits that way with me, i see people always digging up telsa tech and trying to turn it into a free energy device. Like his oroginal solar pannel you can purchase plans from a scammer. It does work, but produces very very small amount of energy, you don't need to buy it to understand how it works, i believe i read about it at wikipedia many years ago.


With something that could tap into renewable energy and save our asses, i would say it would be hard for it to be squashed out like its nothing, surely some creditable scientist would painly sit through your demonstration, but if he saw something worth investagating, as a scientist, he would investagate with something like nobel prize ringging in his head. If he found it does work and taps into some unkown or not understood renewable energy, then he would be talking to other scientists and showing them. As scientists are freinds, and people like you and me, the information of this new amazing tech that works would spread widely.


Though i have to say, if someone did create a device which produces more energy than consumed, a scientist, in my view, would have an idiotic responce and quote the conservation of energy, despite there dealing with a common man who wouldn't be able to study the real source of energy. The conservation of energy is true, but the statemeant that claims a machine can't produce more than used is missleading in the sence that you can have a machine which produces more energy than "YOU" put in, if it creates more energy than you put in, that tells you that in some way, you are extracting energy from an enviromental source. As a good example, a solar panel "you" put no energy in(Other than to build it), yet you get energy out. To someone with no understanding where the panel is getting its energy from, they would view it as a device which you put no energy in, yet get energy out. Just make this person dumb enough for the example to work, as it would be easy to crack that mystery when light no longer hits the panel.

There is one other energy loss i forgot about, which i don't fully understand so i might be wrong in how im describing it, but it has something to do with either particles or just the magnetic field colliding with iron particles within the conducting coil. But, i know that magnetic attraction from the coil flowwing current does add to the friction, ill dub that magnetic drag, which could possible be eliminated by the method which i stated eariler.

Is my idea that lame>? That is dosen't deserve a scientific response? I thought for sure on this one i was sticking with the laws of science. It works on the basic princible that nature does to balance out magnetic waves, like how a peace of steel isn't a magnet until you heat it up an apply a magnetic field to allign all or some of the poles within it. Normally the poles are scrambled, switching back and fourth like my idea, which makes the metal a non-magnet.

My idea will still create a strong magnetic force, it still follows the laws of how you generate electricity, as in noth and south poles moving around the conducting coil, what makes it better than normal generators is the magnetic drag thats no longer contributing to energy loss. Friction will still be there, just not as much.

Cheeto, please make us a diagram, it is difficult to understand how your idea works with just vocal descriptions

Ok....i will get on that, shall be very soon.

It takes but a minute to click a button, I'll even give you the link. John Bedini.
I understand your concern about quacks but this guy is legit and proves it in the videos in front of physicists. Physics was my major at one time so I have an interest in this stuff too.

Its kind of hard to imagine how something works....i really need to get some magnets to set up the same magnetic situation to see if it works. Im only thinking it will work on the theory that.....if you magnetically pull from all angles around a ball, and the ball is directly in the center, then there is no drag when trying to spin the ball. Set up the same situation with all magnetic fields pushing the ball to the center, i know that causes levetation and no friction, because i've seen it done.

I know in a regular generator, The top of the conducting coil would be (N), and imagine the center magnet being (N) on one side, and (S) on the other. Now when this is spining it causes major magnetic drag because the (N) side of the central magnet is being pulled on by the conducting coil, while the south side is aiding that drag by pushing off of the conducting coil, and the reverse situation for the bottom (S) side of the conducting coil.

Anayway, heres the diagram....im no artist.

i will look further into it, but notice that im not a scientist, i just like thinking about science. I do read lots of new discoveries, like for example we should have a kewl new solar panel on the way, unless it will be suppressed. They found an metal(Can't remeber...have to look it up) which converts infrared portion of the spectrum into eletrical, and claim it actually works better as it heats up. They hope to use that in combination with the silicone solar panels to make them alot more efficient.

I hate d/loading things off the internet....i will be looking myself. But being i don't understand what he is talking about, to really believe it i would have to see him show a creditable scientist, which i can look up myself and see he is creditable, and review what critics say. In the past i have seen creditable scientists come up with tech that no one else seems to think works, and there demonstrations failed, and there was always an excuse why it didn't work...one bug needs to be worked out.

I saw youtube videos, they didn't appear that impressive, from people that looks like they "Bought the manual" to construct it. I fell victom to the HHO generators, "Water for Gas", because of lack of understanding. I didn't even know what conservation of energy was back then.

Oh my, now John Bedini is suddenly legit?

What makes this person so special compared to other scammers? Think about this, no scientist is ever allowed to research the device he shows them, hence the "They still don't understand the physics yet". However, you can buy a DVD from him where he explains how to build one yourself. Of course none ever got it to work and all that they will hear back is that they must have done something wrong since it doesn't work. Meanwhile Bedini is still selling his DVD's, standard scam if you ask me.

His compact disc clarifier where he uses "electromagnetic beams" to bath the CD's in before playing to enhance the sound is another of his quack inventions. Remember that in the USA you can patent about anything you like, only when it comes to court will it be looked at, either by lawyers or if needed for the court case by scientists.

Maybe if I patent the use of Ayahuasca-tea plus a given wave pattern where you can bath your HDMI cables into the liquid to enhance the clarity of your digital signal I can make loads of money too, wanna buy a DVD? Maybe wanna buy my pattern generator? Oh, and you have to drink the liquid too else you can't see the enhanced effects...


Kind regards,

The Traveler

He actually encourages people to research his devices and gives you means to do so. Also, being a maverick scientist doesn't mean you can work for free.



Does not understanding how you see entities while on DMT make it not true?

I like reading about these types of 'scientists' as a sort of puzzle. Bedini is a good example. He's surely a clever guy except he makes me wonder if it would be easier for him to earn a living by making real inventions.

On his website, Bedini sells expensive kits to build perpetual motion machines. He claims he can get ~20% more energy out of his motor design than is put in. I looked at some of his motor patents just for fun (especially USP 7109671).

The US Patent Office will not issue a patent for something that doesn't work. It doesn't have to work well, but it has to at least work. What his patent does is to claim several aspects of his motor design layout without making any efficiency claims. Then, in the description of the invention, he describes what would have to happen for the motor to generate more energy than is input (but he never says his motor achieves more than 100%). Then, at the end of the patent, he says the motor produces an efficiency of 98% "more or less".

The claims section of a patent is the part that is protected. Nowhere in the claims does it say his motor can be more than 100% efficient. This means, even though the invention description discusses motors with greater than 100% efficiency, his patent does not necessarily protect anything that achieves that goal. When I say "he", I guess I mean his lawyer. The patent reeks of sleeze IMHO.

Why would a clever guy waste his time working on this? I know that traditional physics does not understand the universe completely. We don't even know what we don't know. But, there are some things we do know and a 'free lunch' is one thing that is never free.

The motor will always be less than %100 efficient and he will tell you that, and no, it doesn't discuss motors with greater efficiency than %100. It discusses how the system will output more energy than electricity you put in. There are plenty of systems that do this. A heat pump is one.

I might have mis-interpreted, but you said ^^^^^^ and also, on his site Bedini says:

"This system, if properly built and tuned, will furnish "free shaft energy" continually, without violating conservation of anenergy. Remember that the del-phi condition across the battery terminals means that spacetime is suddenly curved there, and conservation of energy need no longer apply."

In his patent, the author was clever enough to avoid discussion of "free energy" in the Claims but not in the invention Description. That makes the invention look like something other than what it is.

I'm a big Tesla admirer. I like esoteric questions. I don't think physics has all the answers, but sorry, I just don't believe in 'free beer', 'free lunch' or "free energy". I also don't believe that space-time curvature precludes conservation of energy. I did enjoy reading Bedini's site. It just seems to me that a smart guy like that would have an easier time earning a living by creating something that doesn't try to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Lastly: A heat pump doesn't create free energy. A heat pump only moves energy from one place to another (and consumes energy in the process).

It doesn't violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. That would mean a system produces more energy than what's put in. John Bedini's system works like a heat pump. A heat pump requires a small amount of electricity to run and is actually very inefficient (~50%). The heat energy it produces comes from the environment which we need not supply. The environment is our "free energy". If you look at the amount of energy we supply to it only, and the energy it produces it looks as if the efficiency is ~ 300%, but that wouldn't be looking at the entire system. If you read my posts carefully cker I don't insinuate any of what you are saying. I am speaking of coefficient of performance (COP).

did he actually state that?

This statement is so boooooh!

Any zero-point energy tapping device is by definition impossible: you would need a medium with a lower energy level to be able to tap vacuüm energy and even if you theoretically could create such a state, you would at least need an equal amount of energy to get there.

Elf Machine, I don't want to attack a concept you hold as truth because I'm not all knowing and I have no personal axe to grind on Bedini's concept. I am always skeptical of anything that claims to be free. I hope my words and tone were not offensive.

WOW, my brain has got good enough to think about something correctly! Yes my idea does work, proved by others with the same idea that actally researched the possibility bassed on the same concept. I wasn't the first to think of it, but i didn't know of there idea....i came up with it own my own. While i don't get to take credit for being the first....i'm glad i actually got something right for a change!

I did a search for multi-magnet eletrical generators and found a few different sources. Here is one.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rtdrury/stc.generator.html



though i do have one more idea for a generator, the only thing is i have no idea how to achieve it. But if anyone else has an idea how i would like to hear. The idea is to, in some way, get the current to flow on the surface of a material, in a loop to create the central magnet(s). For obvious reasons, there is less or no friction for current flowing over an object, like for example flowing current over a magnet. Not only would it have less friction for the current, but less heat in the system. The only way i've ever heard of how to achieve this other than a magnet has to do with resistence, if there is to much resistence current will flow over the object rather than through it(if i understood it correctly).

If you could create a wire with enough resistence where current would flow over rather than through, you could possible also use it as the conducting coil. Maybe as you spin the central magnet and current jumps into the coil then hops out and flows over because of resistence. Ill stop there, might be getting ahead of myself.