Controversy?

[finnsawyer]

When the Admin eliminated the Weird Science section they indicated that controversial topics could be discussed in the Diary section.  Well along came Roamer and Harry.  Roamer indicated that he only wanted people interested in building a Bedini device to participate.  This is a request that I personally have honored even though I have strong opinions about OU claims.  Harry on the other hand, put forth his off the wall set of "laws" with no restrictions.  That little blue line that says "Post a Comment" invited a response.  My own personal feeling is that I do not wish to see users of this board subjected to misinformation about force, energy, magnetism, and so forth.  There also seems to be a tendency by some people to belittle the scientific effort that has gone on before, even though the system of peer review before publication ensures a high degree of competence.  So, what do you think?  Where do we go from here?  How do we ensure the integrity of the information presented on this board?  Personally, I will challenge any statements that I feel are not supported by known scientific fact in spite of abuse by the "believers".

[ghurd]

I don't believe in OU. I've been wrong before. You can ask my Wife!

I DO think the area ia fancinating somehow.

I think someone with enough OU tenacity will come up with a better efficiency motor or generator or... something.

I spend a lot of time and money on things I 'know' are not going to work before I even start.

I really don't see what the serious OU people hurt. When it gets over my head, I stop reading it.

"Everything that can be invented all ready has been invented"

Something like that was said, around 1790 (?), during debates on if the USA needed a Patent Office.

2 cents can't buy bubble gum.

G-

[JW]

Hi fin,

 I see you point and i agree, but it is unwise to lash out at others. I have found message boards have a descrete advantage, in that other users may post there own ideas. You really dont have to agree or disagre with others, just state how 'you' feel about how such and such measures up. That way others may veiw both opinions...

JW

[troy]

Although we must treat each other with respect in every circumstance, there is a problem with the idea of asking a group to withold "negative comments".  How is it a real discussion with the possibility of real improvements without constructive criticism?

Criticism, by definition says I think you're doing something wrong.  Hopefully that information is delivered in a positive and friendly manner.  Further, the criticism should also show methods for improvement, or at least why the present plan is flawed.

But to just ask that nobody say anything bad more or less ends useful peer review, in my humble opinion.

Good luck and have fun!

troy

[JW]

Please dont mis-understand me Troy.

  My comment was this- "you really dont have to agree or disagree with others,"just state how you feel" about how such and such measures up...." Forgive me if I am wrong- but thats not an instruction to withhold anything.

 Oh-ya by the way, iFred was right about about coils being "capable" of producing DC voltage(with magnets), and you are wrong- "I can prove this very easily" there is a page in one of Forest Mimms books That clearly addresses this confusion, as well as RMS converions to DC. Just ask, and I will show you were to find this information... But Yes... all "alternators" will produce AC output due to the N-S-N-S magnet arrangement.

Hmmmmm

JW

[JW]

I just want to state for the record, that I was fortunite enough to both get into, and attend UNIVERSITY.... I participated on the entry level, with no remedial classes necessary. I guess my SAT scores were infact good enough. Nuff said?

JW

[Chester]

I'm not quite sure what you're on about here.

I've tried it both ways. Magnets NSNS and magnets NNNN. I get a nice sine wave either way, but the NSNS changes the polarity of the wave, each cycle. I think it moves the field back and forth and the speed of the move makes for more voltage, but that is just my guess.

Also, I have observed that the wave peaks and so does the voltage, when the center of the magnet is over the center of the coil. I have read contrary opinions in this forum, like leg excitment. What's right?

I'd be interested in how to get DC current from spinning a magnet over a coil, without rectifying the voltage, if it can be done. I don't have the book, so a simple explanation would be appreciated.

On the subject of the Bedini motor, I have tried a new transistor, a 2N3055HV and observe a somewhat different trace than from the 2N3055 I bought at Radio Shack. Just prior to the closing the circuit and initiating the pulse there is a brief voltage spike that exceeds 20 volts. I think this is what Bedini calls radiant energy. There is no explanation for it I can see, and I don't know; where does it come from? The battery voltage doesn't ever exceed 5 volts. With this chip, it seems to stay on between pulses, being modulated to about 8 volts by the positive coil wave. Also, at the end of the pulse there is another 20+ volt spike of cemf; this is the current stored in the inductor that is released when the circuit is opened I think, which is well documented in literature. Since all this voltage is changing value, all the time in this chip, it all should be able to be captured by a secondary winding.

If the secondary winding is of heavier gauge wire, than the primary, will the current out be greater? Don't know. Just asking. Not trying to create controversy.

[JW]

[finnsawyer]

Chester, when a charge moves through a magnetic field there is a force on it that is at right angles to both the magnetic field and its direction of motion.  This is what causes the hall effect as charges in the wire respond to this force and pile up on one side.  Similarly, if a copper wire is passed over the pole of a magnet,  the electrons in the wire will pile up on one end of the wire causing a voltage in the wire.  If a copper or aluminum washer is made to spin over the pole of a magnet a constant or dc voltage will be induced between the inside hole and the outside rim of the washer.  Unfortunately there are problems trying to make practical use of this effect.  For one thing, the voltage is small.  I hope this helps.  

[finnsawyer]

The point is that people visiting this board are trying to build things that work.  They don't need misinformation, dead ends, or distortions of how the universe works.  There is usually only one truth.  If you jump off of a bridge, for instance, you go down, not up or sideways.

[JW]

fin,

Unless there's a Hurricane

Cheer's

JW

[JW]

moment of inertia???

JW

[finnsawyer]

Yeah, there might be an exception.  But isn't that what these guys are looking for?  And shouldn't they prove it's true or that it works?  In my opinion challenging them helps the process.

How about this comment:

>The common recognition is that "The blades provide the power to turn the neo, so the power from the neo comes from the wind !" This is absolutely incorrect ! !

Challenge it or let it go.  I think you can see how murky this can get and how people can get confused if statements like this are ignored.

[DanB]

I guess I've just gotten bored of discussing it.  I'll tolerate a bit of it in diaries... since what they're discussing there now, actually has to do with folks who are building things and  - while I feel the outcome will be predictable - it may serve as a good discussion and perhaps something will be learned.  I dont mind Chester, or Fred or some of the other folks who are actually building.  On any renewable energy forum - this topic will unfortunately come up from time to time, at least what well have archived here will be fairly quality stuff and perhaps we can point folks to it.

I do have very limited patience for it all though... but since we have some very wonderful, and older users here on the board that want to continue their dicussions Im happy to let them do so and I believe there is no harm in it.  Nobody is making claims of 'overunity' yet - in the past it's happened, but usually someone has stepped in and pointed out the mistake in good faith.  We'll let the current discussion run, I think for the most part we've made it pretty clear what the point is of this board - I dont think we'll see too much of it on the front page anymore.

[troy]

Dear Chester,

Please see my post under homebrew electricity for a restatement of the original thesis and some clarifying information.

PS  Mr Mimms is a really smart guy, but the example you describe from his booklet does not correspond to my original stated example.

Best regards,

troy

[troy]

Sorry Chester,

My fumble, I meant to invite JW to look at the most recent posting under homebrew electricity.

All the best,

troy