You are here: FreeEnergyNews.com > Directory > Inventors > John Bedini > SG > Feb. 2005 Comments

John Bedini and Peter Lindemann's Medium and Large Motor-Energizer Project

Bedini team explains what they have been up to, and discuss what the Bedini SG was/is designed to accomplish as a teaching tool on the way to more advanced energy tapping technologies.  Discuss new medium and large motor-energizers. Using 24-V 1600 Ah batteries.  Lighting 1000 Watt array of bulbs.

Preface

The following are excerpts taken from posts made by John and Peter to the Bedini SG discussion list, which is supplemental to the Bedini SG project at PESWiki.  Personal aspects have been removed from the dialogue to keep it to science.

This series of comments came after more than a month of silence from John and Peter.  The silence was broken when Sterling Allan posted a comment as to why he thought they were being silent, that they did not appreciate the Bedini SG project being called a lemon.  This got both John and Peter posting prolifically, explaining what they saw the purpose of the Bedini SG to be (not to achieve or prove over unity, but to demonstrate some basic radiant energy principles upon which to build, as a starting point).  They said they never intended to just give away the instructions of how to produce a working practical device.  They also disclose a great many details about two larger devices they have been working on in the past few months while the Bedini SG project has been taking place.

The discussion sequence includes comments interjected by people with varying degrees of electronics training.  Some give Peter and John benefit of the doubt that though some of their explanations seem to defy present electronics "laws," that they may be onto something, and are thus content to give them a fair hearing.  One professional, who is open minded to the idea of radiant energy and yet-undiscovered laws of physics, dismisses John and Peter because several  contradictions with known laws of electronics in even explaining regular phenomenon, and caution people against wasting their time with what appears to be disinformation possibly intended to throw people off track.

With that preface, here is a very interesting series of posts by John and Peter.  The interim comments by others may be view on the discussion list, which is open to public view without subscription.  The photos section may require subscription, but the main images have been copied here.

Some of the spelling and punctuation has been corrected.

Click here to go to beginning of message sequence:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/messages/907

Posts from John and Peter

Responding to not hearing from John or Peter by Sterling Jan. 31, 2005

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/934

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 8:07 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Not Hearing From John Or Peter


... We have been very busy. We have taken this device to a much bigger size.

...The test was, does it charge the secondary batteries or not.

.. In the small models you do not need to count the turns, just fill the roll with wire....

...All your charts indicate that the secondary batteries were charging ...

... I have said many times what is going on in this machine, I said that the machine must be much bigger in size.  The SG is just experimental to learn the process, you did a good job at that. We also said that the meters would not give you the correct readings because of the radiant spike, which they did not. Jack Welch said in a post to your group that he could charge big batteries 400Ahrs.  That's something.

...I'm happy that Jack Welsh did it and reported it.

... We said that the energizer, and not the motor produced 29% mechanical power under ideal conditions. We said the energizer was rotating on a hidden field.

... Your machine did work, you just could not measure it.

... maybe Jack can help, since he has charged the biggest batteries so far to date.

Sterling you have had some really good people on this group, but the confusion has killed them off, especially the off topic posts and nonsensical measurements. The point is did it charge your secondary battery while it turned the wheel, yes or no, and if it did charge your batteries then that is something.

John Bedini

Responding to Re: Not Hearing From John Or Peter by Sterling Feb. 1, 2005, which was a response to John's comment.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/957

From: "Peter Lindemann"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 3:06 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Re: Not Hearing From John Or Peter


Dear Sterling,

... John and I invited you to visit our shop and show you our research into Radiant Energy. We said from the very beginning, "we do NOT talk about free energy." We showed you at least 10 working models of rotary machines and a number of solid-state chargers. They all worked as we said. We tested many of these machines for you and your engineer. We allowed you to see and photograph whatever you wanted.

... As for OU, John HAS had machines here that ran for 60 days without stopping, running on ONE battery and charging FOUR batteries. I told you directly that I tried for over a year and a half to duplicate this process on my own and FAILED. It is not as easy as it looks to get the system working perfectly and batteries working perfectly to get to this point.

Your Bedini_SG motor actually does EVERYTHING it is supposed to do. First and foremost, IT WORKS! Second, it runs like a motor and recharges a second battery. Third, it produces mechanical force at about 25% efficiency, measured as foot-pounds per second out in relationship to watts of electricity in. This is an aspect of the machine you have never attempted to verify. Fourth, even though the MEASURABLE electrical output meters at about 30% of the input, the secondary battery (under ideal conditions) charges at over 90% of the input. This discrepancy is evidence of our statements that the Radiant Energy is 1) present, 2) responsible for most of the battery charging effect, and 3) non-responsive to the standard meters. This is the basis of my statement that "you can't prove it!"

My analysis of your model is, that when the mechanical output is added to the optimized battery re-charging effect (not metered electrical output), the system is operating at about 110%. I have no doubt that many of your tests fall far below this, but that does not disprove anything.

In the last few months, John and I have built two large, multi-coil machines. One of them runs on 24 volt, 450 amp-hour batteries and charges a second equally large battery bank. The second one runs on 24 volt, 1600 amp-hour batteries and charges a second set of equal size. This last unit is our first set of experiments with a battery large enough to run a solar home! At the end of the charge cycle, these 1600 amp-hour batteries are boiling at 31.2 volts!

... There are people in this group who are making progress. To all of you I say, keep up the good work. ...

Peter Lindemann

PS John will post the pictures of our latest machines and battery banks to the PHOTOS section soon.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/962

[See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bedini_sg/photos/ (second page as of the time of this posting)]

Bedini Energizer 1600AmpHr

1600 Ah battery array.  Batteries were dead, found in junk yard, used in cell towers.

Medium and Large motor-energizers.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/963

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 9:38 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Marcus hope this helps


Marcus,

First things first, Their is a lot more going on in the front end of the motor or oscillators then can be measured, there is power returning to the primary section so the meter is in error. Their is a type of PWM across the input lines, output is much different and can not be combined with the input. Trigger signal is again much different. If done correctly you can tap these useable currents, each one is different in form and is not additive. If you have a variable inductor and a small light bulb across the inductor you can adjust the input impedance, say on the positive line input. You will find that any wire leading to the machine has this problem, unless you use water pipes for the wires. The impedance of the output wires is the next problem, you must match the impedance of the load within one mill- ohm, this means big cables in and out. The energy floats over everything, the scope may not sample fast enough to see it. Ben Is right about impedance problems. On are big machine the coils hiss, can't get rid of it. You can sometimes feel this energy build up, acts more like a gas around the wire, just like Tesla said.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/970

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 8:57 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] An Answer To Marcus


Marcus,

The system consists of 24 1600 amp hour batteries, the box you see in the picture is a control manual switching box. the machine is constructed with 1" Plexiglas because everything interferes with the energy recovery. The load panel is lighting 1000 watts of light bulbs we have a maximum of 2.4 kw we can use, the coil arrangement is something that I can not talk about, the control is one device, as I said the coils must match the battery impedance within one mill-ohm impedance. the wire is number 6 ott stranded wire. the battery impedance is 1 mill-ohm on the square batteries and 3 mill-ohm on the round batteries, this is because of the plate difference in the cells, The big machine runs at 770 RPM, the multi pole small machine runs at about 2,500 RPM. The big machines input current is 10 amperes, the little machine 5 amps. I go by a standard voltage on the cells and only measure one cell at a time to tell the state of charge. I do not agree with Yo Tango on what is going on, applying AC to the batteries is not good idea and the battery does care what is on it's terminals. I can see that Yo Tango only understands the basic textbook concepts. I said that it looks like PWM, it is not, and it is not AC.

I measure the cells by differential equations I can tell you the state of charge from one moment to the next. We only use 10% of the big batteries at 1600 amp hrs. The batteries can deliver 210 amps at 24 volts continuous for 8 Hrs, running these batteries at 10 amps is way under their C20 discharge rate. The cores are welding rod as I have always used, if you use a neo magnet you saturate the core the trigger does not work right. We pull power from the primary cell while the machine is running charging the second battery bank. Marcus this is not about current charging the battery. All the battery books state you must supply electron current to the battery to charge it in a reverse mode, the battery does not need any electrons, so you can't put any more in them. If you put more electrons in the battery they just boil and each time you do it this they are dieing a slow death from heat you can not force the chemical reaction, you must lower the impedance of the battery to a state where it thinks it's charged, and it is charged. The mechanical power of this system is limited to 10%. The magnets are made by me and I can not go into that, but I can say that it is standard material. Look on the small machine you see that 1 amp light bulb, it is in series with the trigger signal this controls the impedance to the trigger coil, works like an old tube oscillator circuit. I also have went through all the post on the group, to determine what the confusion is, my answer later on this one. The duty cycle of these machines is 11% on input. The idea is to not burn up much input power, the return is way over 450 volts in tension across 1mill-ohm on the secondary batteries. The SG is just a simple energizer to get an understanding of what is taking place in the trigger and output. The next question you asked, why do I not tie the grounds together, because when you do that you have no hope of a unity system, it's known as a closed loop system, these systems run under unity and always will. Over Unity or unity systems are always open loop systems just like nature, as soon as the group learns this the light bulb will turn on. Ben has not chimed in but this is all about the impedance of the system. Marcus I got over what people think of me a long time ago. This group has been given more information on my systems , then anyone on the internet could ever hope for. I work on this system 24/7 without rest, so I should know what is going on in the system. The small scale systems need to be tuned just right to work in unity. I do not know what you are doing in your system so I reserve any comment. One last comment, The answer is all about the impedance in the cells, the lower the impedance the more power you can get from the cells, once again you can not put any electrons back into the battery, it already has what it needs. If you force electrons at it, it will boil away the water in the cells causing heat, heat will damage the process that takes place in the battery, each time you do this the battery will become weaker and weaker until it is useless. This is why their is a space under the cells so the damaged parts can fall off until they short out your battery.

John

Responding to Response to Peter by Sterling Feb. 2

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/975

From: "Peter Lindemann"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 11:47 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Re: Response to Peter


Of all the Free Energy systems developed in the last 100 years, Nikola Tesla's discovery of Radiant Energy is one of the most profound. When I became interested in this subject 32 years ago, the mythology of Radiant Energy was well established in the literature, but the METHOD for its production was UNKNOWN!

Since that time, two threads of independent research have come together to clarify the truth about Radiant Energy. The first thread is the monumental, experimental work of John Bedini and the theoretical modelling of Tom Bearden. The second thread is the unsurpassed literature research of Gerry Vassilatos and the experimental reproduction of Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter by Eric Dollard. In 2001 I published my book "The Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity" tying all of these threads together with the nearly forgotten work of Ed Gray's EMA motor.

This book reclarified the TWO fundamental methods for the production of Radiant Energy discovered by Tesla. This process is generally referred to as the "fractionation of electricity". Tesla discovered that this process could be accomplished in two ways, generally named "inductive fractionation" and "capacitive fractionation."

The schematic we gave you for the Bedini SG group is COMPLETE and the system produces Radiant Energy by the inductive fractionation method. ...

Radiant Energy is a huge reservoir of potential in the Earth and can be tapped directly from Nature or extracted from ordinary electricity. The key to the EFFICIENT extraction of this energy is IMPEDENCE MATCHING! John and I have stated these things repeatedly.

...I appreciate the good you have done, Sterling, in bring[ing] more people's attention to this process. We never told you we were giving you the final set of plans for a self-running power supply. We told you we were giving you the complete plans for a system that produces Radiant Energy so you could study the phenomena. Radiant Energy is similar to electricity in many ways, but it is also different from electricity in many ways. They both will light lightbulbs, run motors, and charge batteries, but they do it in different ways. ...

Respectfully,

Peter Lindemann

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/979

From: "Peter Lindemann"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 5:49 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Impedance Matching...


Dear Jim,

Very Good! You are totally correct about your analogy with audio
circuits. After all, John IS an audio kind of guy. If you look
carefully at the circuit, you will notice that the output section
looks very much like a simple class A amplifier with the battery in
the gain section. What a coincidence.

Just don't give up. You are much closer than you think, and the
efficiency of the system goes up as you approach the proper
impedance. You CAN do a lot on your tinkerer's workbench.

Keep up your clear thinking and don't listen to the "nay sayers".

You're on track.

Peter

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/981

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 9:17 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Impedance Matching


Jim,

Good work, yes it is a matter of impedance, this has been the most important thing all along. Peter is correct when he points out that, that it is nothing more then a special type of amplifier, all circuits try to mimic amplifiers, digital can not do what the analog circuits do. The lower the impedance the more the power. The idea that impedance is not part of this analogy is just absurd. You have questioned what can you do to lower your impedance, big wire a much lower DCR diode and a tracking trigger circuit, you can find the answer to this in the post to Marcus. You can also see it in the pictures I have posted, in the medium size machine. Look very careful and you will see something you do not have in your circuits. I have not give this group the advancements in the power circuits because we must have an understanding of what this simple SG machine is first. Their are those that think you can tell everything from the picture, not so in this case unless I point it out. The term free energy does not apply here in the SG energizer/motor, to be much clearer on this subject, take Tesla's work. Their is nothing free about energy excluding solar cells, wind machines, water power, and ground currents which will hang around long after mankind is gone. Solar cells only give their energy when the sun is shining, wind only when it blows to turn a propeller and water power only as long as their is a river to dam up. Tesla's magnifying transmitter will only pump the radiant energy as long as their is a "power input" to the circuits, power input is the device that allows all this all happen, yes you must have some power input, the power input in the SG, "is the battery", the only free part of this is the trigger once the wheel is turning. You must "pump radiant energy" to get it out of the circuit and must also have some kind of gain mechanism in that circuit to expand it.

The gain in this rotary amplifier, is the coil, the secondary battery is what that gain in energy is delivered too. The impedance of the battery is very low so you can find the voltage by measuring right across the diode,( do not measure to ground) you should see the total amount in voltage gain, try it. The term free energy is false and should not be used because it's not free you must work for it, to use it. The simple SG motor is not so simple after all this, it works very hard to charge your secondary battery with no real measurable current. The next problem is, you are all measuring with a digital means, not fast enough, an analog meter would do far better because it would average the pulse current. If you do not have this then take wire and wind it around a compass you will see the deflection, and that will give you the indention that the pump is working to the output battery ( it must be over the battery or it will not deflect). Now the pulse going to the secondary battery is much higher in tension, it just creates a stress current in the secondary battery to lower the impedance of that battery, and that is all their is to it. No hidden secretes in this simple process, lower the impedance in the battery, it will give you the power in amp hours.

Very good work Jim and all.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/984

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 12:19 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Thanks Ben


Ben, this is exactly right on track to the bigger machine, I'm glad someone took my name in vane, better you than me, but I have taken my own name in vane after popping 100's of devices into clouds of smoke. Folks this is not a simple machine and everybody sees this different, For those without an engineering back ground your in big trouble. "If the engineering is built into you", you will succeed sooner or later after you get past the mind blocks.

In a way Ben is right when it comes to a big machine, but the real question is how do I control the impedance , not an easy task as you shall find out after you spend hundreds of dollars on transistors or fets. If the group thinks for one moment that the pictures I have posted are even close to a E-Amp design or a SG think again, the energizer in the pictures is completely different including the magnetic construction of the rotor, The normal rotor on the early machines can only develop a limited power level as can be seen by the pictures of the early machines, not so with the big rotary machine for their is no magnetic fields like you have ever seen before on the rotor, it is based on full scalar electromagnetics of which I can not go into on the SG group. I can say that it requires full, Quaternion math, The machine does develop and is running on scalar fields. I can also say that the coils look like a dead short to the devices. I can also say that the trigger is not recorded or discussed anywhere on any of my pages and that I have not discussed it with anybody except Peter who works 24/7 with me every day without fail and it is from the year 1971 in my lab notes, and that the only other person that ever knew of this energizer was my good friend Ron Cole, dead now. That machine cost us 30.000 dollars to build. so their is nothing free about it. I can also say that it took about a month to machine all the parts and some could only be made by hand. The devices are not in any electronic stores at hand and must be selected for the proper impedance by buying 100's of them. So yes their is a lot to building this machine. But the group is not at this level yet. I started to go into it with the drawings located on my home page, but I found out people just did not understand and that my skills in writing this was not in me at the time. But what I did do was to try to give three different people pointers into this direction, but they could not make it run either. Peter and I did make it run after smoking it three different times, and when those batteries smoke something it's smoke. The term E-Amp is the early multi-pole machines, it has nothing to do with this biggest machine. Ben is leading you all down the right path in building a bigger machine, but I must admit Jack Welsh also has found something out and reported so, Jim is on his way their, to have total success. The SG energizer will if built right charge every battery you could collect from junk yards, and you could make it from junk, a 25 watt light in total darkness is pretty bright.

So this group now has people on it that can make this a success if the focus stays. The SG is a simple version to gain an understanding into this energy. Yes I will say this again one junk yard battery can charge them all. I think Ben has many hours into this field now, he builds everything and has the knowledge to do so. Jim is the next in line to have total success at this, Jack has already done it. The SG built big will show a whole different picture even if it only had one big coil. Simple rules, C20 discharge rate, big batteries, properly adjusted trigger, ferrite magnets, low impedance coil. Here you have the answers, to make it work.

Thanks Sterling for the group and the pages.

Thanks Ben for the comments on the energizer, it helps. I also hope this answers some of the questions I received by e-mail tonight, as to the cost of this machine.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/987

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 12:55 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Hope This Helps Jack


Jack,

I think Tesla had everything we have now with the exception of semiconductors but he was working on something like that. We are still using his power system, we do have beam rays, we do have harp, we do have tubes and florescent lights, we do have robotics, we do have transmitters, we do have superconductors, Tesla was the first to do it by cooling one of his coils with liquid nitrogen. If I really get into it Tesla just about gave us everything we are still using today, and he also had PWM control, mechanical but he had it. I even think that E.V Gray's motor was a Tesla motor, all AC motors are Tesla's. He invented the whole power grid we use today. He showed how to wind high inductance coils with low impedance with uniform capacity, and he was stopped in the radiant energy system by Morgan. He did it with a pumping action, he gave the analogy in Tesla said .Their is also one paper missing where he denounced AC power over his radiant system, can not find that paper anywhere, but Peters friend did see it and reported it. He Had Everything to work with, and if he did not have it he had it made. He even was developing his own math for radiant energy shuttle systems.

Hope it helps

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/995

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:01 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] An Answer to Jack, digi


Jack,

What is it that you feel is missing, I would like to here it. You have my full attention on this one. I thought you were going to get rid of the inductive spike, I would like to know more about that? Maybe we should do this off the group.

While I'm testing the big machine you have my full attention on this subject.

As for the Amplifiers things have changed, and they are controlled completely different today, split sing wave dual differential drive, feedback and servo control, along with feed forward bias control is what controls the speaker. Amplifiers hold pretty much constant under load the speaker changes under voltage swing from rail to rail, low frequency requires more power while higher frequencies require less, the power supply must be rock solid and should not sag under load, next the output section should always run in the SOA curves for safe operation, second emitter breakdown is the biggest problem, the output devices should be rated for 1amp at DC at the full power supply voltage. The bias should be able to track all heat in the devices, or thermal runaway will take place, It's known as a VBE multiplier. The speaker is nothing more then a big motor and has an impedance curve all by itself at different frequencies, the amplifier must track this and stay flat no matter what the speaker impedance does. As a matter of speaking ON Semiconductor just came out with a output transistor that has built in diode in each one, to rid the amplifier of it complicated bias circuits and eliminate all crossover distortion in the output section, the same thing could be done in the SG motor with that base emitter diode. As the heat changes the driver transistor for SG, power is lost, trigger current is important in the SG, track this and you have solved the impedance problem of the secondary battery. The motor can be look at as an amplifier since the coil is in the collector circuit, output impedance is connected through the diode, and the battery is inverted, same thing as the signal at the transistor off the collector in the SG circuit. The battery will change it's impedance as it charges, the same as the speaker changes impedance across the frequency spectrum, the speaker may be 8 ohms at 1000 Hertz, but at two and three cycles it may only be 1.5 ohms, tough load for an amplifier transistor. The SG also changes it's impedance the same way.

Have a nice day. You have my full attention.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/998

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:48 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Emmett


Emmett,

What I was talking about was the resonance in the input current that can be tapped. Does not apply to you Emmett. [Emmet built the "black widow", a Bedini SG variant that has purportedly achieved OU.]

I know I run off some times, but I was asked serious questions by private e-mail last night as to what the big machine is and what it cost me to build they are members of this group. It's true I have been trying to get to this point for 30 years, as Digi points out. but at least I made my work public where others did not. Laugh all you want about it all, You will find out the same way I did. I have said. What Math I use to get things that work, you may choose to use anything you want.  It's free to choose your method. When I say, "you have never seen the magnetics I use," that is what I mean -- it's not in your books.

... I have led no one around in circles with the SG. I gave Sterling the simple circuit to do and allowed him to publish it, since it is my patent. I was in hopes that it could be done by everybody to accomplish Sterlings needs for free energy.  This was not the case.  I can see that you have trouble with simple circuits and that they are meaningless unless they are complicated and the meters can measure something.

As you can see the normal math has got you nowhere, or everybody would have every battery charged. ... All my machines are in plain view and are made of plastic so you can see through them, nothing hidden, no black box. ...

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/1005

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 11:03 AM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Digit


Digit,

You need to put all this to rest.  [That] was just a way to look at it.  People sometimes see things in a different analogy. Ben has the best post to what is going on for the SG. When people use different transistors in this circuit some funny thing can and do happen.  There is a small bias current as Sterling found out when he thought he discovered the solid state oscillator. We are just going through all the possibilities of the SG circuit....

I have found the same thing a long time ago. If you close your mind to see one tree you may hit the other trees not knowing it. you must have an open view of the whole forest to find what you're looking for. My claim is that this device may not use the same rules. Peter and I have seen many things that the meters and scopes do not indicate, yet a simple compass does.

Your formula is correct for normal forward converters, [but] may not be correct for this machine, since it is not a forward converter in the normal sense. I can see how you look at things and you have my full attention in this discussion. In my second to the last post I pointed out something to you about tracking the base current. I can and do see this leakage current taking place in the devices. Their just must be a better way to adjust the tracking. I just pointed out to Jim that we use a light bulb to do it now on the older machines, but not on the new one, as the circuits are much different.

Knowing about this little leakage that does take place the transistor does have a small bias towards the negative end of the devise.

Have a nice day.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/1029

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:08 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Sal, Marcus


Sal,

Thank you for the short tribute to Ron Cole and the short analogy of the motor that Cole and I built over 20+ years ago.

For all those that do not know Ron, I worked with Ron many nights on new types of magnetic motors that have never been posted to the internet. We both were Audio engineers with over 35+ years in the field. My task after working in the semiconductor industry, was to design a line of amplifiers new to the market place, known as the first dual differential drive amplifiers.  The amplifiers were the first to couple a qusie output to a dual drive using feed forward bias. The first of these amplifiers were built at acoustic control and were used at every rock concert in the USA.

Second I was to study magnetics as a hobby in my spare time. Cole and I built many motors with the first neo magnets that GM had. Sal got to see one of these motors. Ron's motor was not stoppable.  There is still one of the motors in my lab which Stan Mayer got to see run.

The Mono pole motor Energizer is one of the motors that always gave the best results recharging batteries. Their are many variations of the mono pole.  The mono pole is the SG you are now building.

In our experiments we did discover the art to building a mono pole in how we arranged the magnetic structure for motor use.  Taken from my lab notes from the 70's is now the motor posted to your picture section in this group, now on Sterling's front page news.

I do however disagree in the way Sterling has written this as I'm to be judged by what people with professional electronics training in this field speak up who are you experts. You have my full attention in this matter. It's a 24 volt system Sterling and not a 12 volt system.

I have checked what you have done Marcus.  The motor you have built is one half of a G-field with self triggering.  Why not put the other half on their, then you will see something -- but yes it does what you say and that's good work.

I'm sorry you are have trigger problems with the pots, but you can change it by adding one little light bulb in series with the trigger. I have already told the same thing to the group in one of my posts. Your batteries need to be much bigger if you can do that, by 2 or 3 amp hrs. It will give you more time to watch what is going on with the trigger.

I did not notice the small part of a ac sine wave that should be there, because of the arrangement. Can your scope see this? I did look at the scope shot but did not see what I was looking for.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/1031

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 9:29 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Ben, Colin


Ben, Colin

Yes Ben and Colin I have measured a high voltage around the coils on the big machine that I have posted to the group, the coils are all hissing. Peter has the machine grounded real well to the big batteries. We can not see anything but we can hear it. I'm trying right now to dig out my old electro-scope meter. Can't find it yet.

Colin, I have seen the same thing with a probe, so I'm real careful with that Tek digital scope, don't want to buy a new one at $5000. I just hate when I must send something for repair. I will try to take some measurements tomorrow for you. I did get shocked good when we first started running it.  It did leap from the coil on one of the poles. I think it's the plastic, but you all know I want you to see right through the machine. When I check it in the morning I always grab a screw driver and hold the metal part with one hand, since Peter and I have been running non stop 24/7 on this machine, I just do not take any chances.

John

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Bedini_SG/message/1035

From: "john_bedini"
To: <Bedini_SG@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 10:46 PM
Subject: [Bedini_SG] Fred


Fred,

Sorry that I did not get back to you right away; but yes, we did spend the bucks on this machine, but in that figure we did build a little model of it. We wanted to know that my lab notes were correct.  The model did one thing the big machine did another. It was very frustrating at the time.  The magnetic fields were so much bigger than the model. But when that baby fired up and started charging those big batteries -- what relief!

Any machine when scaled up will have it's problems at first, and we had them.

As I have stated the machine is from the 70's.  It's just been in my lab books all these years. I did take peter and I about a month to machine all the parts, some we had to do by hand. The batteries were about 300 pounds each cell, and we broke one: six gallons of acid on the floor. We were eaten alive trying to get the acid off the floor. We moved the batteries by hand into position. The batteries were sitting for about a year in fair condition. The machine charged them right up. The charging takes 36 hours each time we cycle them, we run the energizer 24/7. Hope this answers some of the question you might have. 

Anyway have a good evening.

John

Epilogue

John and Peter ream me in their first few posts (edited out from the above compilation).  That's okay.  I gave my response to them.  I'm glad for the disclosures that came as a result of my posts.

-- Sterling D. Allan (Feb. 3, 2005)
(who compiled the above information)

See also

• Bedini SG project at PESWiki - full set of plans, list of replications, data, etc.
  • Sterling's Replication index - to see how much work I've put into this thing.
• Bedini SG discussion list - beginning with Sterling's provocative post that fomented this disclosure.
• Bedini SG discussion list - most recent messages.

Page posted by Sterling D. Allan, Feb. 3, 2005
Last updated February 09, 2005