Sterling,

What you say below is not true, and it does not appear that you have
even experimented in the ways you comment.

First, the same thing would be true in a conventional circuit then.
As you put more load on it it also goes slower, but it draws more
current. Maybe this is new to you, I don't know. You can use a
transistor to fire it as well and it will be all the same.

If you watched the video then you would have heard me say that
loading down the circuit not only gives you more mechanical power
output, but it reduces the primary draw and also can in many cases
improve the charging rate. You bet there is a mystery in this. But
you never tested this so why do you disregard it?

Again, the rotor spinning without additional load takes more energy
to spin than under load. Show me a conventional motor that does that.
Explain this then. Who really cares about the rpm of a motor that is
not functioning as a motor? The rpm is fastest with the least load.
The input is least in that condition. Now load it and it draws more
and goes slower. But here it is different. If it is no mystery then
why is there a difference?

Again, not only do we draw less current under load but we still get
the same or better charging. How is that?

If you notice when you start your SSG it draws a lot of current at
slower speeds. Just look at the pulses. So it is not about speed as
you say. Have you ever had a meter on the front end and noticed the
difference in current as you start up?

I was at John's shop and filmed and have shown the film of that setup
blowing air. There was a strong air flow clear across the room at
full speed. This was some incredible amount of work for that setup at
that piddly amp draw. Running any conventional motor to spin that
very large fan at that rpm to produce that much air flow would be at
least 60W as shown in my video. None of which charge any batteries.
Further, all setups I have run with fans do the same thing. When run
at the same rpm as the conventional circuitry will take less watts to
run while charging batteries near, or at, or over the rate of
discharge of the primary. As you know from your recent interview with
Peter L., that as you reduce the BEMF in a motor it takes less to run
that motor. And here, if you reduce it by charging another battery
then you have a two-fold benefit. This is incredibly significant, and
is one of the major unique themes in John's patents. If there was
nothing to that then there would not be any real substance to the
patent as your entire comments suggest about this technology. I say
this because your comments imply that you assume this is all
conventional processes.

Sterling, all you have to do is replace a brushless motor's circuit
with the SSG and you can see the difference. I have shown you how to
do it. You already know the SSG can charge up batteries, when it is
not supposed to do that at all, now you can make a direct
comparrision by seeing what it does before and after the conversion.
This is what you are asking for, and I have already outlined it for
you in video and in word. Remember, John made that tape motor the day
before your visit to show you this very point, that you can use
conventional motors to charge batteries. Now I have shown you another
step in putting a load on it. Now do the same work while charging
batteries. [And yes, I wrote the other day, but NO ONE even
responded, that I was able to get approx. 13 times the output in
charging alone from that model setup and that computer fan setup,
just by doing what John said on this list as part of the instructions
given. You laid it all out. You may not have taken down all the
information right, and Peter may have mixed up the part about cycling
the batteries back to the front against John telling him not to say
that, but John wrote about what you can do with these simple SSG
Energizers once you understand what you have.]

Just simply note the rpm of the brushless motor fan under a given
wattage that it is meant to run at, like a computer fan. Then replace
the circuit with one or two SSG circuits as I have shown and get it
up to the same rpm or same wattage and tell me the difference. If it
is the same rpm then I have found it to be less wattage. If the same
wattage then greater rpm. This is signficant gain. Now that is all
fine and much greater efficiency, but add to this a significant
recovery in the charging battery and there is a GREAT mystery here.
Nothing like it anywhere. You know this Sterling. You belittle the
mechanical, but it is there, if you can take the time to factor it.
1.8W to drive that fan conventionally. Much less than that to drive
it the same speed, the same RMP. You may say a fan is not work, but I
have to pay 40W to 100W each to drive 5 ceiling fans in the house,
and I have driven a SSG fan for months on end with a rotating SSG
(with the added cap pulser). What is that equal to in power
consumption and money. 10cents a kwh. 20 cents a day or so of piddly
work. You can even make some of the resistors bulbs as you see in the
new DVD, as I have done and have some free light. I like to make a
switch so I can turn the light off for a resistor. There are a lot of
fans around here everywhere I look. There is also need for light and
other motor power. So your skepticism makes no sense. You never did
the calculations, or took the time to learn how.

The video gave you more than a hint of this so your skepticism is
rather pushing it. It is simple enough for anyone to verify with much
less money than even making the regular SSG. Again, I outlined what
the method would be.

As for my data, I have shown that to those who have been serious and
not prejudicially critical. I have no interest in becoming the martyr
of this cause to be plagued with thousands of people asking the same
old questions about a given setup and spending my days with skeptics
trying to attack me. As I said, I do not expect to prove anything by
video or words. I have traveled the whole country and even
demonstrated that one setup to people, some of which refused to
believe what they saw. They tried to take it apart and look for
tricks! PhDs could not risk their reputations, etc. Then there is
what people say to you off the record... The whole point of this is
for people to show themselves with their own parts what this can do.
It is not about any one motor, or any one set of data.

The truth is no amount of data would be enough. You would always
belittle it until perhaps the whole world finally had it in every
home and laughed at disbelieving it. I say this because you have not
shown any idea of the amount of free mechanical in these systems. I
have given you a very simple way of looking at that in comparing it
in the most direct way with conventional motors. All you have to do
is replace the circuit and drive the same motor and load. One gives
you no return, the other does. One gives you more Watts with less
work and one gives you less W with more work. SAME MOTOR (not even an
identical motor). When you do that then I will start to take your
response more seriously. When you understand what it takes to move a
big fan and notice how much it was taking with that fan with the SSG
then I'll see.

Again, I have tested and compared identical work done with identical
speeds, both AC and DC motors. I have run ceiling fans, computer
fans, and even cage motors for the furnace blowers, and many others.
In each case I drove the motor with significantly less Watts. This
was done with all types of meters used. With or without batteries.
Even with transformers connected to the wall with the wall watt
meters connected between, running it either way to compare the
difference. You saw two of these running on the SSG with some
numbers. This shows you it can be done. This is not proof, but it is
all that is needed to take this seriously. You already know that it
can charge batteries. So the fact that I can get the same fan running
while charging batteries ought to take away that skeptical attitude
that keeps demanding more.

You want free, you get free charge back with the same work being done
in the same motor that formerly gave you nothing back. And you say
there is no mystery in any of this??

I shared in the video some of the data, enough of it for people to
verify for themselves to do controlled experiments. I gave some
pictures with the numbers of windings as well. I did say the page was
just started and more will be added over time. So your condescending
skepticism is rather pushy when I have just spent a lot of time
giving such a detailed presentation on my own free time. This is also
in the context of doing this for the very active BM3 list with 453
members, a good number of which are doing similar things. This is a
Model presentation in which many will replicate in their own way, and
which many sets of numbers will be presented by me and others over
time.

What happens when you ask the experts to examine your data, and they
even spend a whole week testing it? At the end of the week they tell
you they cannot report what they have found. Look at what happened
with TUV back in 2000 when John and Bearden presented such data and a
model as shown here:
http://www.icehouse.net/john34/bedinibearden.html

They paid big money to have that done and even filmed it with all the
repeated load testing. I need not repeat what happened. The filming
is there, the data is there, the models are there, but just like
anything in life, there are motivations for disbelieving it. Your
website shows how those motivations hinder progess all the time. And
think about it, just who would be willing to sacrifice their career
to put their name in with such a cause? Not very many people as we
can see in many other subjects. Gather some statistics personally. I
talk to thousands of people, and have met thousands of students in
the finest universities across this land, and have discussed many
vital issues with them and professors and professionals. I am very
much aware of the cowardice and fear and prejudice that exists in the
land in so many important subjects.

I have got similar results to the TUV testing even with these basic
SSG setups. Even when you post the numbers people ignore you or just
disbelieve it. Then you get the Myth Buster "experts" building it
without magnets with MIT approval to call you a fool. Is this the
kind of approval I have to have in some data posted? You see it will
never be enough until the skeptic Randi approves it, when he creates
the conditions of what truth is. You invite them and they will take
it appart and destroy it in front of your eyes. You run it for a week
and a month is demanded. Run it a month and a year is demanded. Run
it for a year and a decade. Then something is wrong with everyone's
meters. Then it must be something in the room. You go out in the
desert or anywhere, or in a cage of choice, still something is hidden
somewhere. The truth is you cannot convince someone who does not want
to be convinced. The majority of experts cannot afford to even look
at this and their employment is at risk to side with it. It is easy
to be a conventionalist as there is so much pressure to be one. That
is why we say just build it for yourself. You did but you did not
follow all of the instructions and also did not know how to determine
what you saw (and still do not). So I have told you what you can do
at a super basic level.

Look, it is evident you plainly disbelieve in the claims of this
technology, otherwise you would have not been so pushy in the data
when I wrote what I did about all of this work in progress. I want to
see many people post what they found. I really do not care what
popular opinion believes, especially in the mechanical sciences when
they stick to closed looped circuitry. If you are only changing one
factor with a conventional motor, by changing the circuit, and you
see this kind of difference, then there certainly is a mystery. A
mystery as to why you and others ignore this fundamental difference.
While I do not expect you to believe any testimony, it would be
equally bad to disbelieve a testimony without verifying it. You are
clearly disbelieving here without justification. Or you are just
really mistaken about mechanical calculations. I write this in good
spirits so don't take it the wrong way.

Rick

> Hi Rick,
>
> Loading a normal motor typically results in drawing more current.
As you know, the Bedini SSG circuit is not set up that way. Current
draw in the SSG is a function of how fast the wheel is spinning. The
faster it spins, the more times the circuit fires, the more current
it draws. If the wheel is loaded, making it spin slower, then the
fewer times the circuit fires, and the less current is drawn. There
is no mystery there, as I think you will agree. We shouldn't talk
about it as if it is a mystery. It's pretty straight-forward, even
though different from conventional motors.
>
> Yes, John's SSG demo I saw had a large fan attached to it, but it
didn't spin very fast, so the load was not very big. As you know,
power out in the case of wind is a cubed function of the wind speed.
John's set-up just barely got a small breeze going. That's not
anything to brag about, nor was it intended to be. It's just an
illustration that there is some load that can be applied.
>
> What I gather from your answer is that you, nor anyone you know,
does not have a presentation of data somewhere that documents
overunity from this system, in the "free energy" sense of harvesting
energy that is free for the taking -- some kind of environmental gift
that, in this case, science in general has not yet accepted. While
saying it isn't your mission to prove this, you turn around and say
that this system is accomplishing just that.
>
> All I'm asking for is a clear presentation of the data, because I
don't believe this system is doing what you say it is. I think it's
wishful thinking. But I would be glad to be proven wrong -- with
solid scientific data, which a scientist could look at and confirm
that the numbers look good, then reproduce for himself and get the
same results. That is science, and it should work with this system,
just as it works with wind power or solar power. It is reproducible
when it is grasped accurately. The "how" of how it works can keep
physicists busy for decades to come. First we need something
convincing to show that this system does harvest free energy.
>
> When you sent me notice of your new video and introduction page, I
was hopeful that maybe there would be something there that not only
claimed that free energy was being harvested, but would give the data
and the corresponding experimental set-up to support that claim.
>
> As for the charge of one battery moving to the other battery
through this system. The reason the input battery can be lower in
charge than the output battery, is because in this system, the input
battery is merely keeping the wheel spinning, and as long as it has
enough charge to do that, the wheel will spin, and as long as the
wheel spins, it will likewise generate an output pulse directed to
the charging battery, whether low or high in charge, it will increase
in charge until saturated. No mystery there either. It is
interesting science, but shouldn't make anyone with electrical
background scratch their head.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I don't want to discourage the work you are
doing, or dismiss this most recent video as worthless. I'm not
saying that. I'm just bemoaning the lack of solid data.
>
> If you're going to make a claim, as you do on your intro page, that
this system results in a net gain of energy, then you need to account
for how you arrived at that conclusion, other than just saying that
you did and that many others have as well. I don't buy that. It's
as easy for a bunch of people to get pumped up on hope as it is for
one. Let's see some hard evidence.
>
> You don't need to run your video the entire duration of the
experiment, just show us how the experiment is run, and show us what
your numbers are, and impress us with those numbers; then others will
be motivated to repeat the experiment to confirm that what you say is
true, and jump aboard the task of improving the system to the point
of providing practical output that can make a difference in our
energy-hungry world.
>
> I'm merely asking, "have you or someone you know done that? if so,
where might we inspect those reports?" It doesn't have to be
documented on video either. Just a description of the experimental
set-up and the results obtained will suffice. And those results are
going to need to rule out the possibility that the energy is coming
from those 12-volt batteries, which contain a lot of juice.
>
> Thanks
>
> Sterling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick Friedrich
> To: Sterling D. Allan
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:26 AM
> Subject: Re: New SSG Presentation video now online
>
>
> [I have sent this to your SG list but not sure if your moderators
will allow it. I will be placing it in the public domain on the BM3
lists and elsewhere, so I expect as you asked me these questions on
your list, that you will allow it to be answered there.]
>
> Sterling,
>
> This is a work in process. The page will be updated over time and
will be merged with an instruction document for the BM3 list as I
have time to work on it.
>
> I am not claiming that one battery is transfering energy to the
other battery, even though I may use the terms charging battery and
primary battery. If that was the case then you could not see what was
shown in the video where the secondary battery was at a higher
voltage than the primary, as I mention in the video. Two batteries in
parallel do not result in the initial lower battery becoming higher
than the initial higher battery. You have missed this.
>
> As far as your questions, in the video I expressly say that it is
not intended as any proof of OU, as that is impossible to do with the
limitations of video. It was intended to be a basic overview of the
SSG to help people understand the system and how to build and test
it. I said it was only the beginning. The Bedini DVDs show more of
what you are interested in. You can only prove this to yourselves. No
number of PhDs will be able to prove it to you or the world. Truth
does not depend upon people with certificates. There are PhDs who
believe in this, but what does that matter?
>
> There are several objectives stated in the video along with the
basic presentations given. You must watch it in a different light.
You must watch it as in front of your own setup while seeing the same
things. IF you see such and such, then what does that say to you?
Not, I am proving with this video that such and such was happening at
that person's house I was demonstrating it at. The video was sort of
misc. in nature according to the time I had. If I had months of
planning and the funds I could have done something different.
>
> I was showing the other motors so that people could see that you
do have some free mechanical, and the relationship to charging and
amp draw with mechanical loading of the rotor. This is very clear in
the video.
>
> While the primary purpose of the SSG is to deal with charging, I
was explaining in the video in relation to the desired tuning sweet
spot, that you can adjust the machine so that you can get more or
less charging or more or less torque. I also was giving some
estimation of the kind of mechanical work that can be done with this
motor/energizer. While John has made some comments along the lines as
you mention he has very clearly said that you must not ignore the
free mechanical factor. I show some of that. Many of John's setups
have fans as shown in the recent EFTV DVDs. The picture on the front
of this your SG list shows a very large fan that you saw some years
ago running. I have posted some video clips of that running, and you
see it in the DVDs. All agree that it takes a lot of power to
conventionally drive a large fan like that, much more than that
circuit draws. No conventional circuit drives a fan like that for the
imput the SSG puts into it, and none recover what it does into
another battery. This is thus a significant amount of free mechanical
work. While it is not as mechanically powerful as other Bedini
motor/energizers it still is powerful and significant. John is not
satisfied with it as a motor for several reasons, one being that
there are other better motor systems like the window motor and also
more suitable circuits like the bipolar Ron Cole circuits as shown on
the GnOsis.com forums. But John has always said you could drive some
mechanical loads, and always said you must calculate that free
mechanical into your estimation of output work done (which I see you
never did).
> What I have done is compared conventional motors with the SSG
over the years. I have shown a little of this online, but the point
was to explain the baiscs enough so that everyone could show
THEMSELVES. Sterling, I am not trying to prove anything to anyone.
But merely help those who desire to learn for themselves. This is
what the new video does. So I have compared the work done with
conventional ceiling fan blades at a given rpm with the work done
with a SSG driving the same blades at the same speed (and the same
angle of the blades). Anyone can try this for themselves as some
have. I found that I could either push more air with the same amount
of input energy to the system or I could push the same amount of air
with less imput. I also found as John has shown, that as you load
down this circuit's rotor you can draw LESS from the primary, and
sometimes charge better in its own sweet spot. Anyone who bothered to
listen to John, which few did, and appreciated the free mechanical
would have found this.
>
> I explain the same thing can be done with the conventional
brushless motors when I remove their circuit and replace it with an
SSG circuit and charge another battery. I even show that when I
remove the charging battery the system takes more to run.
>
> I have published the details and given some overview of these
computer fans running this way. Thus a 150ma standard computer fan
can push so much air at 12v input, say 1.8W. Now replacing that fan's
ciruit with one or two SSG circuits (which is a little tricky because
of the fine wire so I recommend doing all this with a bigger
brushless motor) as you saw John do with that tape motor setup he
made the day before your visit in 2004. I show that same tape motor
driving several fans. Back to the computer fan. Now if I drive that
same computer fan that normally takes 1.8W to get to the stated rpm,
with an SSG circuit at 1.8W input what kind of rpm do I get? More rpm
when the secondary battery is attached and charging. If I want to get
it to the same rpm as the conventional circuit it will take less
wattage to do that WHILE CHARGING A BATTERY.
>
> So why you never saw any significant mechanical is a wonder to
me. Your wheel alone would have taken some power to rotate, and
easily could have had a fan attached to it, etc. But here you can see
that I can drive a conventional motor even better with less power and
even have recovery. Again, here you see that we can do this with only
changing the circuit and still use the same blades and frame and
coils and magnets.
>
> As I have told you, it does not matter what size you go with
this, the free mechanical is there. No, it is not the ideal system
for motors, as there is iron in the coils that limit the mechanical,
and the strength of the magnets used in the magneto. But the window
motor is not the same as we have shown with the SSG driving it.
John's lab notes as far back as 1971 show the SSG circuit driving a
window motor.
>
> Bottom line in answer to your two questions, while the free
mechanical is not as good as other setups, it is still free. If you
can get free mechanical then you can scale that up to any size to get
any amount of free mechanical. That is the point. This is not THE
motor setup. Not the ideal motor setup. But it is a motor generator.
And I have taken the lists to a new phase beyond what John was first
showing this list at the beginning. Although he was showing this even
the day of your visit, and long before you came along on the other
lists, web pages, and books, the the first objective was for people
to build the setup and notice the two energies, etc. That is done so
we now look deeper. But those who do not go beyond conventional
theory will never follow the further instructions, nor will they
experiment contrary to the limitations of in the box conventional
theory. They will never even try what John shows on the front page or
in the DVD.
>
> I have not found a limit to the amount of output that can be
experienced on the SSG. Once you watch the second Bedini DVD that may
make sense to you. I am not going to quote that copyrighted video
here. Once you actually finish building the SSG and testing it the
way John instructed, not necessarily the way Peter said to, then you
should understand the two different energies and what you can do with
the basic SSG. You folks are failing to consider that this is not
conventional charging so you will never even understand the basics
besides how to build a free radiant energy SSG. You don't know what
you have so you don't know how to use it. For example, you don't
appreciate the free mechanical so you ignore it, and never even try
to load it down as I have shown in the video. But notice your picture
on the front page of this list? This is the model and it has a very
large fan on it. That is THE example given, and it is a laugh to
ignore something so significant as that. So now, if you begin to
notice what you have, rather than look for someone else to show it,
or some thousands of others, then you will see what else you can do.
I have shown in the video several other things you can do. The Bedini
DVD shows you very clearly.
>
> As far as OU. Let us look at a solar panel and wind generator,
which I have used both. I have received infinite OU in the sense that
nothing was required of me for the input, yet a continuous supply was
given. I have had different setups run like this with Bedini systems
as well as I have mentioned. Once you get enough power output then
there are ways to power the front end enough to be self-sustaining.
So then you are in the same situation as with the solar panel or wind
generator. But there is no end to the debate. Then the debate will be
where is it coming from. So I respond the same way as where does the
wind come from. It is free at the end of the day. I am not a physist,
but I do know what a Faraday cage is and that it makes no real
difference if you are in the desert or if you are running your setup
in such a cage. So I have found no limit to the amount of output in
charging that can be done with this system. And that is not referring
to the length of time but the amount of work done over and above the
operator imput. The answers you are looking for are in this list in
John's emails, some of which come right from your keyboard. When you
build and test as instructed, and don't go off into other directions,
and don't assume this is a closed looped conventional circuit, then
you will understand what it is.
>
> It is not my objective to gather lists of people who have done
this or that. The truth is not determined by numbers. I don't care
who says the earth is flat when I have lived here in the new world
that conventionally was non-existent and in space. People with
degrees have the exact same motivations hindering them from
publically talking about this non-existent "New World". I know it is
frustrating to see all the prejudice and cowards and greed in this
world, but the world has not changed in this respect. We can now fly
despite the skeptics who denied it. We can now all communicate
wirelessly too. We can all now get free energy from the sun and wind
and other sources. The truth has always been there for those
practical people who were just willing to investigate without
prejudice and take freely the gifts of God.
>
> Rick
>
>
> "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@...> wrote:
> Hi Rick,
>
> Thanks for letting me know about this.
>
> I've reproduced it, per your allowance in the statement: "this
copyrighted presentation may be freely distributed provided that
nothing is altered, deleted from it or added to it".
>
>
>
> a.. Electromagnetic > Bedini SG > Bedini Monopole
Mechanical Oscillator Simplified School Girl (SSG) Presentation -
Bedini student, Rick Friedrich, presents his set-up, claiming that in
the process of moving charge from one battery to another through the
motor system, that this system can achieve a net energy gain,
harvesting energy from the environment. (FreeEnergyNews; July 23)
>
http://www.freeenergynews.com/Directory/Inventors/JohnBedini/SG/RickFr
iedrich_SSG/
>
>
> I did take the liberty of catching a few spelling errors on the
page, that do not change the meaning.
>
> In viewing your 1.5-hour presentation, I have a number of
questions that I would like to address.
> a.. Do you have a page summarizing your data that
shows "overunity"? Does it include a description of your
experimental set-up and measurement protocol?
> b.. Toward the end of the video, you were running some other
motors/fans with the SSG not running. I must have missed something
in your explanation about why you were doing that.
> c.. Your description says that the input battery charges the
output through the system, while generating free mechanical motion.
My experience with this set-up, and my recollection of statements
made by John are that this system is not designed for mechanical
loading. It is very weak for sustaining mechanical motion of
substance. You make it sound like this is merely a matter of scaling
up or down, depending on the desired output. What am I missing?
> d.. In all of your experimentation, what were the best
results you achieved. What percent over-unity?
> e.. How many others do you know of make a similar claim --
overunity?
> Thanks
>
> Sterling
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rick Friedrich
> To: Sterling D. Allan
> Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 9:55 AM
> Subject: New SSG Presentation video now online
>
>
> Sterling,
>
> You may be interested to know that I have made a 1 hour 35
minute video and pictures of a few model SSG as an all-in-one
presentation:
>
> http://rpmgt.org/SSG.html
>
> This is available on Google in low quality at 84MB or medium
quality at 1.4GB.
>
> I will make it available on DVD for just over $5 next week.
People can freely copy and freely give that away.
>
> Rick
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> Building a website is a piece of cake.
> Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
> Got a little couch potato?
> Check out fun summer activities for kids.
>