The April 10 event in northern Idaho will feature a new Tesla switch that enables the batteries in a solar array to last much longer, while also enabling more energy to be drawn from the solar panel system. The Renaissance Chargers and 10-coil Energizer kits will also be demonstrated.
If you're into unconventional alternative energy technology and have been wondering when something is going to finally make it to market, here's a development that looks like it could be a "foot in the door" – a significant next step opportunity – in that direction.
On April 10, 2010, at The Lodge at Sandpoint, Idaho, USA, Owen Mullen is going to be holding an Alternative Energy Conference where Energenx Inc., and Renaissance Charge, LLC. will be showcasing recent as well as the newest devices they've come up with. Admittance to the conference is $50, and the rooms at the lodge (27 available) start at $99.
Here's a brochure image by Owen Mullen of SunlightBioelectric.com who told me about this event. He's been involved with Energenx for about five years.
On that day, John Bedini and associated companies are going to be showcasing several of their technologies, including the Renaissance Battery Chargers that have been available for sale for about three years now, the new 10-coil Energizer Kit we announced Tuesday, and a new product line called the "Tesla Solar Charger" by Renaissance, manufactured by Energenx, that will be commercially available by then. It is designed to significantly prolong the life of the solar battery array. I'm interested in possibly getting a Tesla Solar Charger for the sustainable house I'm building.
|
|
Motor-Energizer Kits
As mentioned in our story two days ago, the motor-energizer systems do several things. Their secondary purpose is to charge batteries in a way the helps rejuvenate them so you don't have to throw the battery away. They trigger radiant energy production in the tradition of Nikola Tesla, and that radiant energy doesn't show up on traditional meters in the form of amps, but it does show up in the form of battery capacity and longevity. The energizer pulls much less current from the wall when recharging the battery than traditional chargers, thanks to the salutary help of the radiant energy effects. Rick Friedrich of Renaissance says that they have sold hundreds of these as kits.
Renaissance Battery Chargers
The Renaissance Battery Chargers that will be on displayed and discussed by 1Friedrich have been commercially available for about three years.
 Here I am with the R-Charge device hooked to the battery of my minivan last week. |
I have the RC-1AU battery charger (second from the left in the above photo), and have had some success with it preventing me from having to throw batteries away when they become too degraded in their performance. For example, so far my minivan has made it through one of the coldest winters (crazy global warming – NOT), despite the battery having started to go out last Fall, going "click, click, click, click," instead of turning over the engine. That was around the time we were going to be moving down here to Mount Pleasant, UT to Randy Tolbert's solar guest house, having sold our home in Eagle Mountain, so we could roll its value into a sustainable home we're in process of building now. We could barely afford the rental moving truck, let alone a new battery for the minivan.
I put Bedini's RC-1AU on it, just once, for about half a day, and that was enough to rejuvenate it back into a range that it would hold the charge well enough to start up the car whenever we got in it to go somewhere. And when you only have one vehicle, and you live remotely, and you have places you need to be on time; knowing your battery is going to do its thing provides an important peace of mind. It wasn't until last week that it wouldn't start up the engine for us, going "click, click, click" instead – and that was most likely because my kids had run it down while they were cleaning out the car that day. So I put the RC-1AU on again, overnight, and I'm guessing that we'll be good for the balance of the winter. It's acting peppier now.
Friedrich points out that this is the wrong charger for charging automotive batteries, and voids the Renaissance warranty.
Announcing the Tesla Solar Charger
Last night I had a conference call with a guy in Australia who is looking for a leading-edge renewable energy technology that is ready to go into manufacturing now. Of all the technologies on my radar, the only one I could think of, scanning through my list of the Best Exotic Free Energy Technologies, was John Bedini's new Tesla Switch Solar Charger. Serendipitously, right at 9:00 pm when I called in to the conference call, John Bedini phoned me, and I told him I'd call him back.
"It's a Tesla switch," Bedini told me. He also directed me to his Energenx YouTube channel where he has recently posted several videos of what they are calling a "Tesla Switch Solar Charger". He said to pay close attention to the meters and "draw your own conclusions".
Here's one of the videos of "the small one". The units will come in probably ten different sizes, ranging from being able to handle 1.2 A-h on the smallest size, to being able to handle 80 A-h on the biggest size.
"Tesla Switch Solar Charger 3.5 amp max input. This is the smallest of the Tesla Switch Solar Chargers. This switch is made for RV's with a single panel. This is the newest of the Renaissance chargers." (YouTube; February 05, 2010) |
This Tesla switch apparently pulses a charge into the batteries about two times a second, so you see both the input current and the output current bouncing between zero and a higher value.
At a lower output setting on the power supply, the voltage meter reads 17.4 V, and the current peaks at about 2.7 amps, which comes to 47 Watts (a x v).
 The DC power supply shown at the top passes current though the Tesla Switch Solar Charger shown on the bottom.. In this screen grab, the voltage is 17.4 and the current is 2.2 amps. |
Meanwhile, at that setting, the analogue meters on the output coming from the Tesla Switch Solar Charger to two 12-volt batteries (which have been rejuvenated by the same system) show the voltage sitting at about 14 V (a function of the battery level), and the amp meter bounces between zero and about 7 amps, making about 98 Watts at the peak. That is more than twice the input at its peak.
 The DC power supply shown at the top passes current though the Tesla Switch Solar Charger shown on the bottom.. In this screen grab, the voltage is 17.4 and the current is 2.2 amps. |
Then Bedini turns the "panel voltage" from the DC power supply input up to 19.6 volts, and the peak current goes up to 3.9 amps, for a max of about 76 Watts. Meanwhile, the output meters show 14 volts and a peak of about 13 amps for a max of about 182 Watts -- again over twice the input. Mullen relates seeing a magnification of power on the order of 3 to 5 times the input.
Reflecting on this, you can't help but imagine what this might do for a solar array. Could it enable a reduction in the number of panels needed by half or more for the same power output? So not only would this unit save on the cost of battery replacement, but could it also enable a reduction in the number of panels needed in the array?
Mullen said that an R&D unit has been on his house for a couple of years, and it works when it's cloudy outside, and even at night, because "the solar panel picks up UV rays from the moon, stars, and what slips through the clouds," and the Tesla Switch Solar Charger turns that into radiant energy which easily goes into the batteries.
Rick Friedrich, who is the most conservative and grounded of the Bedini crew, and who is manufacturing the units, emphases what the unit does for the batteries:
"All I have stressed for 3 years in Renaissance is that we restore batteries in most cases and we see the batteries last significantly longer. Yes there is free energy in this in one factor: You can restore a useless battery and save money from buying a new one for pennies in cost of electric. And you can keep your batteries (I personally believe Lead-acid loaded probably will just keep on going with our chargers). But as I said to you a year ago in great detail, we have not focused on making free energy commercial products. That is a rather expensive and involved process when you are plugged into the grid. It is also extremely controversial and will sink a company down with more troubles than they can deal with.
"If the solar chargers can result in more out than in, that is not something we will claim or push. Again, or aim is merely to have a really good charger that will allow customers to hopefully restore batteries with little practical capacity and keep their batteries. And here is the catch. It is only so if they do not severely abuse their batteries under load as probably 1/3 or more people do. If you overload your batteries too often and warp and crack the plates then we cannot help that. So we don't want people to be under the wrong impression in this either."
Mullen said: "Rick is very conservative on claims and is careful on getting possible negative feedback from so called experts." What they are willing to say publicly is that the Tesla Switch Solar Chargeer increases the output of the solar panels and keeps the batteries in a well-maintained state.
Batteries are a significant expense in a solar array, and typically have to be replaced after around ten years. The Tesla Switch Solar Charger could prevent you from having to ever replace your batteries.
Bedini tends to be less cautious in his exuberance in these battery technologies, which he's been pursing with a passion since the '70s. He told me that these Tesla Switch Solar Chargers can put out a lot more, but that he purposely clamps down their output, which could be "massive". "I don't dare turn it up."
They've put the design through rigorous testing, trying it out in all kinds of types and conditions of batteries.
Available Soon
Mullen said the Tesla Switch Solar Charger will be priced in the low few hundred dollar range and will most likely be available from the various dealer's websites, including Mullen's , who said:
"I have personally used all the chargers in my lab on my farm and am getting ready to install the controller into my off grid system on my straw bale house. They work very well for power tool batteries, flashlight rechargeable, car batteries, T-105 Trojans, L16 Trojans and large banks of batteries hooked in series, up to 144 Volts.
"I personally have restored over 100 different batteries that were either from the landfill or ready for disposal. I have had my mechanic verify their efficacy also as he was ready to re-place my wife's battery with a new $76.00 one and checked out her old one before and after and said after the R-charge treatment it was better than the new one he was going to put in.
"Lots of testimonials on both r-charge and my web site. This is the real deal."
# # #
Comments
Oscillator vs. Tesla Switch
On February 13, 2010 1:17 AM PM Mountain, John Bedini wrote:
(Slightly edited)
The people can draw their own conclusion, as I can not talk about free energy and sell the product. I posted a new video with analog meters as people do not believe anything. But now they have no excuse.
"Small Tesla Switch Charger with analog meters." (YouTube; Feb. 12, 2010) |
We can't and wont make any claims since we are selling things in the US market. I would say the people testing will tell us what is going on with these conversions in power.
The Tesla switch was shown in 1984 at the Tesla convention. At that time I gave out all the diagrams for it. I did not do anything with it for over 20 years. The Tesla Switch waited for 20 years for the correct devices to power this re-designed device. The original Tesla Switch was much different in the way it worked as many tried to build it and failed. Their will be no kit's offered on this device, that includes parts and diagrams. Today we have micro computer chips we can program for the functions we want to perform. This is proprietary to the Energenx company, so no information will be given out on this.
I'm not going to twist anybody's arms to buy these products. From what I can see, the world must go into the dark ages and burn candles before they will accept anything with radiant energy, which is negative energy, and negative energy can come from capacitors or switches too.
Yes, the Tesla Switch Solar Charger increases the solar panel output by conversion , and it's designed to do that; so what your able to see is conversion taking place in the switch, the meters do not lie. The Radiant Charger is a Solar Oscillator designed much different then the SG oscillator. You must understand that Solar Panels are at different impedance then the batteries in a solar home. You must convert the impedance to use them efficiently or you lose. What you're seeing is the conversion taking place in the charger to increase the output (not shown), this conversion is the same for the Tesla Switch or the Oscillator. The Oscillator can work down to voltages of .7 tenths of a volt, Tesla Switch 5 volts, so it can charge in very low light -- no magic except in the conversion here; just good engineering and understanding how things work.
The second thing is capacitors do all the conversion. Why? Because that is real power in joules and joules charge batteries. Pulse power can and does rejuvenate old batteries and causes a gain in the battery if the battery is not shorted out, but the signal to the battery must be correct. These new products do the conversion for you and that's it.
Anybody can read the patent on the solar oscillator on Google patents. That is the one that works in the moon light (very low light). This is the unit Owen is talking about and not the Tesla Switch Solar Charger. The two chargers are quite different in the way they work.
- - - -
On February 13, 2010 11:53 AM Mountain, Bedini wrote:
Yes, Sterling, I'm going to put up Scope traces soon on YouTube. And the pulse is much faster than that, and it goes negative. This is why I do not want to over drive the switch as the battery just boils away.
"Small Tesla Solar Charger current probe test on interstate battery. The current probe corresponds with meters. I leave it to you to come to your own conclusion." (YouTube; Feb. 13, 2010) |
* * * *
See also
|
Comments
Sterling,
Ask John if he can do a video showing analog meters on both input and output of the switch. The digital meter on the input side falsifies and invalidates the results of the qualitative observation in this current video. Thanks.
Better not give up your AAA membership just yet, Sterling. You may be needing a tow. Soon.
give me a break -- just a con job -- all you can come up with is a battery charger and claim it taps into radient energy-- what a joke. Strling you have orbo tech. that has no back EMF - stick with that so you dont look so bad -- come on bendini qiute the cons and just say you have a batery charger and thats all you got. your a joke and you prove it by your products. -- if that-- you guys make me sick
You guys are a joke. Why don't you do something productive with your lives and get a job.
Negativity and apathy are the main reasons we do not have better energy sources. I know that this is a step in the right direction and that the chargers and controlers are much more than just normal tools.
You guys are a joke. Why don't you do something productive with your lives and get a job.
Mr.,
You do not need to ask sterling to do anything, just ask me to do it. So here is a youtube with analog meters on the small Tesla switch charger.
Go to youtube I just posted it, energenx
John B
Grow up people the day has come.
He told me that these Tesla Switch Solar Chargers can put out a lot more, but that he purposely clamps down their output, which could be "massive". "I don't dare turn it up."
... because the MIBs will get him ... anybody can get a little more life out of a lead-acid battery by giving it a few jolts of high voltage to knock the sulfates back into solution - it's not magic. and most any dead l-a battery will start a car after being on a charger for several hours.
Bedini Dual Beam Ultra Clarifier ($179.95 + $10.67 shipping, in the U.S.). This must-have device uses an electro-magnetic beam that "polarizes the polymer in such a way as to maximize the laser's ability to retrieve stored data."
i'll try that if i ever get a "read error" on my PC backup CD's. i am sure it will fix everything so i can read those lost bits.
Chad, you just do not know how foolish you look, grow up go crawl back in your hole.
js
i would bet anything there is money for Sterling in this stuff. nobody that "reports" with a critically thinking mind would otherwise report on this silliness. if Bedini can multiply the power coming out of solar panels, he could just as well create the energy for free, so why doesn't he? oh yeah, those MIB guys, i forgot.
In January, one in every 409 U.S. homes was sent a default notice, scheduled for a foreclosure auction or repossessed by a bank.
Chad continues to talk his BS and try to kill jobs
Banks repossessed more than 87,000 homes last month alone - that's a whopping 31% increase over January 2009.
But then Chad continues to try to kill more new jobs.
While an all-time record 2.8 million households were threatened with foreclosure last year, RealtyTrac expects that number to surge to 3.5 million this year - an appalling 40% increase.
But still Chad continues to try to kill more new jobs.
This is not exactly reassuring news - especially coming on top of December's record 17% plunge in home values ...
Oh my God, Chad is unemployed now and has been looking for a candle so he has light. But he has been locked up in a Fema camp and can't own a candle. TOOOOOOOO Bad
Go back to where you came from Chad
Great Charger John keep up your good work.We love the charger.
Thx f
everything i said is factual. Bedini belongs in prison for fraud. making false claims regarding a product you sell is defrauding the public, and it is a crime. especially if it is interstate in any regard, then it is a felony. the economy is no argument to anything, it merely demonstrates parental failures to educate and provide for their children properly to ensure their livelihood in a free Constitutional Republic based on individual sovereignty and self-government. what we have here is immigration and those that spit out children without proper responsibility, leaving behind a society of uneducated dependent fools that can't function and operate with respect to sustaining themselves and their childrens future in a free society. so, keep whining, and think who the fool really is. i am merely inserting some critical thinking based on evidence. nothing foolish about that. and crime is no way to add to an economy.
I am just a reader of all alternative science (or pseudoscience for others), and I noticed the same general difference in view between skeptics and proponents, regardless whether it's about free energy, cancer cure, astrology, homeopathy, 9/11, aliens visits ...
Skeptics are always kind of people that believe in correctness of our society. They know it has some flaws of course, but globally it works well. For instance, they know that some oil industry can be against free energy devices, or that some pharma lobby can be against cancer cure, or that some group of scientist are unable to comprehend and accept theory that goes against what they practiced all their life. And all these "evil doers" would like that further advancement doesn't take place. Skeptics know that. But they believe there are too many other people who would benefit from inventions or new knowledge, like energy consumers (in case of free energy), like governments that spend awful lot of money of medical supplies...
So skeptics believe that we live in such society that no one, regardless how rich or powerful he is, cannot take control globally. Because that's impossible to happen in this complex, spontaneous world we live in.
Something like believing that you can always win in court if arguments are on your side, regardless how good lawyers other side have, or how corrupt the judge is. Because if such corrupted trial happens, you can always bring your case to higher court, and surely nobody is so powerful to control that one too, right?
Same in science - of course some group of scientist that doesn't like you invention or discovery can locally reject it, but you present your stuff to whole world, and surely you will win. Globally looking, society works perfectly.
The proponents always believe that there's something deeply wrong with our society, and that these kind of things can take place. That's what drives them toward goal.
Taken that we live in deeply flowed society, how can one know for sure if one invention is true or not? Typical man doesn't have time nor money nor interest to analyze everything so deeply to be closer to truth.
There is no methodology in flawed society that will prove for certain whether something is true or false.
So I reason like this - is it bigger sin to believe naively in something that will eventually be proven as false, or to reject and ridicule something that will eventually be proven as true?
I think the bigger sin is the later, since you will hinder the advancement that could lead mankind from needless suffering, whereas in first case you will only lose maybe some little credibility in your surrounding which is basically nothing.
So I will stick to my hunch, and John - keep up the good work!
i am not a "skeptic". i am factual. i supported Blacklight Power since pre-2000, when i first read Dr. Mills publications, and because of my degrees in Chemistry and Engineering, i could see that he had made some interesting discoveries. i supported Orbo since McCarthy first went public with it, because i have enough background in engineering and business to assess that he and his business were not going to put themselves on the line just to prove they are frauds. on the other hand, Bedini can't even construct grammatically proper sentences or spell past the 1st grade level, and has a history of over a decade of conducting fraud, selling/speaking nonsense, while never having any sound provable basis for anything. sorry, but you can't shortcut education. Tesla was VERY educated. the uneducated are big suckers, and/or sell products based on fraud. i see this daily reading free-energy forums. people make-up beliefs for their lack of education/understanding.
furthermore, i study most of all the same things you do, the difference is that i use education to think critically, with the ability to see if i am being led correctly up to the point where educated guesses begin, or to the point where something inexplicable is discovered; whereas an uneducated mind is left to "belief or disbelief" early on the trail. so it is much more prone to error and erroneous thinking/conclusions. i have read and heard Bedini for a decade, and after a decade of BS and no evidence and plenty of nonsense, it's easy to conclude he is, and always has been about fraud; not even mentioning his relation to Tom Bearden - that guy has a PhD in BS. i never heard so much psycho-babble in my life (go read his website about his MEG). there is plenty of REAL discoveries/mysteries that could be written about, but Sterling is missing the education to follow those trails and write about them. that is my main gripe. 98% nonsense, 2% intriguing.
furthermore (again) this here is SIMPLE LOGIC: Bedini is making claims that:
*** these Tesla Switch Solar Chargers can put out a lot more, but that he purposely clamps down their output, which could be "massive". "I don't dare turn it up." AND that he can multiply the power coming out of solar panels several-fold.
2 free-energy claims. so ... knowing he could make millions by selling a free-energy device, where is it? he has been putting forth this BS for a decade - or much longer. he excuses himself by saying MIBs will get him. but where are the MIBs at Blacklight Power? where are the MIBs are Steorn? it's really incredible that there are so many gullible and foolish people. yeah, there's plenty of corruption alright, at the top and bottom. and yeah, if you knew about our current form of govt/citizenship, you would see more corruption that you could uncover in a lifetime. so, i don't discount corruption, just easily spotted frauds.
I have higher education also, and I was once a strong believer in "facts", whatever they are.
I always consider something to be true, because I always had numerous facts about it. Then years passed by and I stumbled upon something new, I dedicated enough time and suddenly new "facts" emerged, and I could understand why I was so wrong about former thinking. Then next year I hear some "facts" for some third approach, and everything seems clear now again, and I can again see why I was wrong two times before. The problem before was that I wasn't acquainted with this other approach, it simply wasn't available to read around so easily.
Then next year somebody presented me the second theory in better light, and these "facts" that I didn't know before topped everything again. I couldn't see them before because I was not exposed to this new explanation.
Then somehow I felt ashamed. So many times I was strongly opinioned about something, just till next turn when new facts emerged.
It seemed facts for everything can always be found, it just matters what we have been exposed to for longest time, or at least last time. A lot of time it's incredibly important who is presenting the facts - when the opponent is telling the facts about somebody, then he is mostly twisting the facts the way he likes it. So you cannot be sure in anything. Oh, I would so love to have firm grip on something, but it just seems that environment around us plays biggest role in our judgement, and not logical thinking as everybody is presenting themselves with.
As Krishnamurti once said - there is literally nothing that you can be sure of in this world, and that's the most frightening thing for anyone.
anyone would be very hard-pressed to find any world-changing invention that wasn't accomplished by someone with very high levels of education. the only one i can think of might be Edison, but he mostly just used extreme persistence to find solutions to things that required fairly basic experimentation. he didn't really come up with original knowledge that led to leaps in technologies. so be wary of people without advanced degrees that claim to have made major advancements in technology. there is no shortcuts. and i don't mean fake mail-order PhD's like Tom Bearden - that joker.
Don't take me for naive one, I protect myself from any kind of thinking and "facts", whereas others just protect themselves from alternative people out there, blindly trusting authorities.
Educated people have usually critical thinking more developed, but they also think "out of box" harder. my profession is in software development, and most ingenious solutions are most often open-sourced, not well-known, and developed in free time by people of varied education. Enthusiasm played usually THE role in invention, not education.
I don't know you personally, so I take your "facts" with good amount of suspicion.
I don't know John either, so I would never invest too much into him either. Granted, Rick sounds usually much more credible than John, but I don't know him personally either.
I don't have to buy stories with MIBs, but I don't discredit someone for mentioning MIBs because I don't have any proof that they don't exist. I don't label these inventors crazy conspiracy theorists for
Faithful One: what you say has some truth, but you are confusing things that simply are facts, with things that are theories, but are taught as facts. quantum physics may be taught as factual, but truly, it is theory. if i am holding a ball, and i drop it, i can calculate how long it takes to hit the ground in a practical sense. we build airplanes based on reasonable facts we know that can be applied. there is a spectrum that truth resides in - and for practical purposes, some things we call facts lay near one end, and some lay near the other end. but the standard in law, and in good judgment is "reasonable doubt" based on the facts that we can "reasonably" presume. and if anyone brings Bedini before a jury, he is going to prison - the only thing stopping it is that he hasn't cheated enough people for a prosecuter to waste his resources on it, and he doesn't have enough to recover from for a civil suit yet.
homeopathy, for example: don't know about it, don't really care about it, wouldn't count on it. but it's sold as something that may or may not work, no guarantees. it is a little more difficult to prosecute for fraud because some say it works, and some don't. biology/psychology is a much more complex matter than selling/proving a electro/mechanical device that operates within a much more confined set of measurable parameters. anyway, if you research Bedini's history, you will find over a dozen pieces of crap he has made claims about, NONE of which amounted to anything, but BS. so believe all you want, but you're betting on a LONG history of nothing but BS, and if you support that, feel free. i am only pointing out his criminality, which requires "guilty beyond reasonable doubt", which is why the man selling the machines WILL NOT MAKE ANY STATEMENTS other than IT'S ORDINARY STUFF! he knows Bedini is BS too. everyone does. Sterling does. but feel free to believe whatever.
There were numerous facts that homeopathy is BS, but there are also numerous facts (eg. fameous Jacques Benveniste) that it works. Official resulution: BS.
Cancer cure via alternative methods (eg. Johanna Budwig): numerous facts against it, numerous facts for it. Resolution: BS.
Instant telecommunication regardless of distance, with constant amount of low power (Hartmut Muller - GCOM): numerous facts for it, almost none against it. Resolution: BS
Influence of mind on matter (even on the processes from past!): same stuff. Resolution: BS.
Astrology: same stuff ...
I cannot vouch for any of these claims because I don't have personal experience, nor acquaintance with these people. Same for Bedini. The people who had personal experience tell stories, but I don't know these people personally so I cannot believe them too.
Just a food for though by one more example from history: Do you know that people who claimed that Sun/universe revolves around Earth didn't make that claim because IT SEEMED LIKE IT, but because THEY HAD EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS and could predict the location of Sun/stars based on it from their equations. Meaning, the "science" and "facts" were behind their conclusions. Of course, their equations were overly complex, they had to introduce some assumptions etc...but they gave predictive results.
And experiments are considered cornerstone of modern science.
Chad,
Sorry to say we did find a way to increase the output in solar panels.
If you have nothing good to say why stick around. If you have something much better for this world then by all means show it to us. Otherwise your just a bunch of psychobabble of old information. And right I do think out of the box with everything I do. What gives you the right to call me a criminal. If I sold popcorn and did not tell you what was in it I guess that would make me a criminal too. What is in it for me to cheat Chad, you buy a kit or a charger you learn for yourself. My devices have patents on them and I can sell what I want built right to the patent. It's funny if you go on youtube everybody is building them and I don't see any complaints just from you. It's a free market and I can sell what I want, unless your telling me I no longer have any rights in the USA. And who is the everybody, name them.
JB
Why are my comments taken down-- is this for the faithful and chad only?? Bindini is a fraud and a con -- I have a right to this opinion and leave it up--- whats the matter Sterling you cant take it. you look foolish with the milow con and now your pushing a battery charger with bull crap claims. stick to whats real -- there are to many real inventions out there that need the spot light. this is about real science not a proven no show con like Bendini. this comment better be left up.
Chad, the other thing here is go learn your history again about inventors.
You talk about being so high and mighty and the intellectual that you are.
You have missed the "Fact's" Edison is not the one, and he is the one that should have gone to jail, in the end he was a big crook like JP Morgan. Tesla is the one that powered your future and you still use the systems today so get the Fact's right. Mr.intellectual, your argument holds no water about educated people as most of the time they missed the Fact's or they're after the Fact in anything they do, like you. That's why you have missed all the Fact's. I'm not required to tell you anything as you would just miss the Fact's anyway. I'm not going to spoon feed you. It's a good thing the Wright Brothers were not educated but were simpletons, they did not miss the Fact's at all, you fly today. Go talk your BS somewhere else. You should pay money for "Slander" and go to jail, how about those Fact's? The Fact is I make everything public
Tesla worship is so old hat. It's really disappointing to me that nobody in this article had cancer. Those Boyce articles really had some punch to them! It would even be interesting if some of the inventors in this article knew how to cure cancer.
Dear JB,
Thanks for the last video. You did put an analog meter on the input. You deserve at least some credit for standing up for your claims. Is there anyway you could measure and report the frequencies of both the input and output currents? One more thing: If what you showed in the videos are true, then one should be able to use a fully charged input battery to fully charge two identical discharged output battery. Can you fully and unambiguously endorse a 1 input to 2 output battery ratio? If so, count on my moral and finacial supports.
MR
Smith,
Watch what you say also, you need to prove that I'm a fraud and a con, in a court of law, which you can not do as most of it I give away to the public.
Sterling has nothing to do with this at all, I do, and that is fact. If you have nothing to say that's good go away. I have claims and patents to prove my inventions. I have hundreds of satisfied people, even Fire departments along with the Sheriff's departments, what do you have?
This is a real invention and it is on trial as I make everything public so what are you talking about? Fraud is a very hard case to prove but "Slander" is not. When I walk to the patent office with my invention you bet it works, I'm not required to tell you anything.This has to do with a real "Solar Charger" and it's documented, solar is a real science. Yes I must limit it's output or the battery will over charge, get it. You people do not read or do the experiments you just condemn people as frauds, we're not talking about Mylow here, he is a produc
John has:
- disclosed most of his inventions freely to people
- he urges everyone to make their own devices by his instructions, having no financial gain in this
- he doesn't scream out loud that everyone can immediately have a device that is so simple and practical that will power your house (like so many FE frauds out there)
- he suggests one to be acquainted first with new type of energy regardless if device goes over-unity or not, and notice various interesting effects this energy has; in other words, not be overconfident and learn gradually about it since this is whole new area of science
- his selling products are advertized as only battery chargers with slight mention of attractive technology under the hood
I really can't see how above facts fit within typical FE-snake-oil-salesman profile?
Smith,
Watch what you say also, you need to prove that I'm a fraud and a con, in a court of law, which you can not do as most of it I give away to the public.
Sterling has nothing to do with this at all, I do, and that is fact. If you have nothing to say that's good go away. I have claims and patents to prove my inventions. I have hundreds of satisfied people, even Fire departments along with the Sheriff's departments, what do you have?
This is a real invention and it is on trial as I make everything public so what are you talking about? Fraud is a very hard case to prove but "Slander" is not. When I walk to the patent office with my invention you bet it works, I'm not required to tell you anything.This has to do with a real "Solar Charger" and it's documented, solar is a real science. Yes I must limit it's output or the battery will over charge, get it. You people do not read or do the experiments you just condemn people as frauds, we're not talking about Mylow here, he is a produc
As I said before, these people who can do no practical work need to start working and get a real job. Stop collecting money to visit the internet to stir up trouble.
Bedini products are well know for 35 years. I have sold the RC chargers for 3 years now with nearly 100% satisfied customers. Thousands of batteries have been reclaimed, and these nameless idoits can only call names. What is fact here? The fact is that everyday people and industry are satisfied with our products. They buy again and again. This makes the competion upset and causes them to stir up trouble. Every time we do something that rocks the boat you get the same goons show up with all their foulness. You know them by their fruit. They do not work and are nameless souls. And here, John barely shows a few videos of prototypes and you get them calling names already! We haven't even made any claims and just let people decide what they will. Well I guess we can only please 99% of the people out there.
anyone can make a battery charger even a very good one.- but to tack on bullshit claims to prop up your ego or to con well meaning people. Bendini dont give me the slander crap. you have a bad history of false claims. you dont know who your talking to, first off. but you have a bad history. if you make a battery charger sell it as that and dont con people. thats why I even bother to take the time to respond. I think you mean well, but I have disdain for deception. any kind of deception. and will call you out any time.
Smith,
I does not make any difference who I'm talking to. Since you will not give your full name your right, I don't know. As for my history I dought you have anything except what others have "quoted" I would beg to differ with you about the chargers, they are different, that's my claim. It's called circuit topology. You have free speech say anything you want to this group of people. Rick has quoted this correct but it's been 40 years. And yes I do mean well in what I do. No one here is forcing your hand to do anything, you force your own hand to bring up the good, bad, and the ugly. I have what I have and that is it, at least I have made it public.
JB
JB (John)
I watch and buy DVDs from Thomas Bearden and John. I have been waiting and watching for this "Solar Kick charger" announcement since I first read about it on the Energenx site many months ago. I told friends about it. Now I only wish I had a solar array with a big battery array. I want to test this out.
I also want John to throttle one up to see what is possible. Our world needs power generators. I see why it is used on solar panels anyway. I believe John's pulse technology is at the heart of a number of amazing devices. Go John and the Energenx team!!! Bravo!!!
JB,
The proof of more TOTAL WATTS output than input including all etheric energy claims is that:
If your systems actually charge up batteries with more energy than required to energize the bedini device (overunity if you will), that customers <should> be able to draw energy off the battery bank while the bedini unit is charging it 24/365 and the battery bank never discharges - - and they should be able to determine at what rate they can <extract> this excess energy without the battery bank energy levels starting to fall. This tells the net gain . . .
If you cannot demonstrate this because you say it cannot be done to the battery bank being charged at the same time - - the solution is very simple - - you have 2 battery banks, and when one is fully charged by the bedini device a simple switch (could even be automated) senses the peak charge, and switches the bedini charger to the second already discharged battery bank - -
CONTINUED next post.
then the customer starts drawing energy from the previous battery bank(1st battery bank) that is fully charged and customer powers his inverter to power his house or whatever. It would be quite simple to determine what level of excess free energy is being produced from a one of the 10 coil bedini units so that the process could be scaled up to the intended load. If there is no load for an extended period of time, the bedini coil(s) should down after BOTH battery banks are fully charged up. Once a significant load starts up again, and one of the battery banks out of the 2 or more battery banks are discharged, the system senses this and switches the discahrged battery bank over to the bedini coils which are auto-started from their own battery or . . .
3rd, if there is a problem "auto-starting" up the bedini device back up, then maybe it could be left running 24/365 with output to ground so as to discharge it safely. Another switch system could perform this function so there was never any hazardous electrical "backpressure" if you will on the bedini device.
Many industries are now using super long life ceramic ball bearings, seems the cyclists use them.
JB,
Again thanks for these last scope shots. Thet clarify much more than you might think.
Respectfully, would you like to elaborate as to why you keep refering to a value of the instantaneous current, namely the peak, as the "current". I'd like to point out that there are major differences between the instaneous current and the rms current commonly known as the "current". The rms current is the parameter that should be used when comparing different currents. It is misleading to compare two diffent changing or switching or pulse or AC currents based on the peak values alone. Since a current with a smaller peak can actually be much higher than a current with a peak of several orders of magnitude greater.
However, I understnand you may have a reason for doing just that. Do you mind to elaborate and shed some light as to why you keep calling the instantaneous peak as the "current"?
Thanks,
MR.
MR,
I think everybody must come to their own conclusion about which one you want to believe. You have four meters their. They all say the same thing. You asked for an Analog meter for the input, I did it for you it showed the same thing within a few tenths. The current probe is showing the same thing. Is the next question can you please put resistors in series with input and output and show us the waves.
The big question did you do the integration? I did. Yes pulse power can be misleading but not in this case or the battery would not boil away. And yes I know the difference between the two. In this case it is pulse current, it's not straight DC is it.
JB
Very telling that he avoids commenting on my suggestion . . .
Dear JB,
3.8A and 8.5A are the input and output pulses peak values, according to your meters, therefore can't be the same as the RMS values of the waves. That is the critical clue. If you don't release the scope vertical and orizontal settings and the current sensors conversion factor, no one will be able to compute the actual RMS values for the waves you showed in the videos.
And NO, I won't suggest a RESISTOR TEST because it's silly and proves nothing. Also note that you don't really need power to make an acid boil. However, I can tell you that, with the 1-to-2 battery ratio test, you will win the world over in a heart beat. Here is how you do that very simple test: take 3 identical batteries, place one fully charged on the input and two fully discharged on the output. If the one input battery fully charges the two output batteries, then the energy gain claims of your systems become undisputable.
Look the above suggestion is for the rest of the world. For me, I give you the
the benefits of doubt, the only thing I need is for you or Energenex to endorse a public statement that any of your systems can pass the 1-to-2 ratio test and you have me on your sides.
Thanks,
MR.
Dear MR,
I don't want to discourage people for testing, but I can say to you that world isn't such a simple place that successful test will win the world over in a flash. It will maybe win you over, but certainly not the world. Taken that Bedini's claims are true.
If you have some revolutionary discovery/invention, situation is nowadays like this:
- revolutionary theory, no matter how good it is, is worth a crap
- experimental proof is worth just a bit more, but still a crap
- the only thing that's worth is WIDESPREAD product for end users, but unfortunately million factors affect whether it will become widespread
So I think that Bedini should keep a low profile and sell his products as nothing more than good battery chargers, and slowly let end users realize there is something magnificient under the hood.
the benefits of doubt, the only thing I need is for you or Energenex to endorse a public statement that any of your systems can pass the 1-to-2 ratio test and you have me on your sides.
Thanks,
MR.
Doe,
Your analogy of this is absolutely correct, this is what destroys inventions.
Notice, this is why you must come to your own conclusion. I have said in my posts about this charger that "The Testers Will Tell The Story" and that is the way I want it. You are also correct that the consumer will see the race engine under the hood and as long as the unit performs the solar people will be happy. The main objective for solar panels is to increase the output as they sit very low now and payback takes a long time. I will make no public statements as to COP levels at all. you must draw your own conclusion.
JB
MR.
I will soon post that test with batteries so you can watch it. I want everybody to have the information so it can never be said that I did not do the test in front of you.
JB
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!