Brazilian Scientists Have Developed A Vacuum-Energy Motor

Brazilian scientists have announced the development of a breakthrough new motor that they hope will soon power everything from cars to industrial equipment. Just like solar panels capture energy from the sun, the Keppe motor captures essential or scalar energy from the so-called “vacuum” of space – which it turns out is no vacuum at all.

Actually, all motors do this, but the prevailing scientific theory doesn’t recognize it. Technology today is still locked into trying to get energy from material and this outmoded process actually blocks the capturing of the free energy found in space. As a result, motors today are much less efficient than they should be.

As non-renewable energy sources dwindle fast, massive environmental damage and global warming continue unchecked and electrical bills and oil prices skyrocket, the revolutionary — and completely green — Keppe Motor ushers in a new era of sustainable, clean and inexpensive technology.

Keppe Motor

New Brazilian Keppe Motor Captures Vacuum Energy for higher efficiency

Youtube:







Now Brazil is jumping on the Vacuum-Energy bandwagon! I wonder if the Brazilian government is going to be more supportive of it than the US government has been....?

Wait this is **SNIP** amazing! A free energy device whose inventors haven't mysteriously disappeared or been suicided?? Is this for real? I can hardly believe it.
Bump bump bump bump bump

Edit for spelling...

[edit on 28-10-2008 by Gamechanger]

Admin Edit: removed circumvention of censors

[edit on 29-10-2008 by Crakeur]

reply to post by Gamechanger


Haha!

Check out my other thread,

"Energy From The Vacuum" Pt 1+2 Full Vids! Must Watch!

As far as I know, Bearden and Bedini are still quite alive as well! And Keppe's design is supposedly quite similar to theirs....

" If everyone will have electricity and energy for free what is the only thing that we can sell? Anntenas?
J.P.Morgans answer to Nikola Teslas proposition of "Wireless and free electricity" project.
Will history repeat it self? I think so.

Free Energy For A Free World!

I doubt it. Something will happen and this will never make it. [Oil Giants Enter Stage Left]

Ye

[edit on 28-10-2008 by DocEmrick]

reply to post by DocEmrick


Come on guys, have a little faith now!

They didn't have the Internet back in JP Morgan's time! Too many people know about this now, the theory and schematics are all over the web, and in books... These technologies will make it, I know it!

What can we at ATS do to help this along?

John Bedini has been doing this for years. In fact, his small motor will put out 12V @ 600 amps! Talk about energy from the vacuum!

Too many threats.

So he waits.

Ill tell you what we can do, e-mail the Orion Project NOW, they are in a unique position to be able to do somethng about this.

Its amazing, its so funny when the people come along and say that free energy is impossible........little do they know the very physics they base their assumptions on are very much flawed.
Damn I hope something comes of this.

Originally posted by DocEmrick
I doubt it. Something will happen and this will never make it. [Oil Giants Enter Stage Left]

Ye

[edit on 28-10-2008 by DocEmrick]

not if I can help it lol...

I just contacted a friend and going to see if we can get one of these built the video's give enough info to get started looking at it.

In the end it will be revealed they just developed a race of nano-Capybara, which run on an infinitesimally small treadmill.

Well, a lot of them.

Not saying that isn't a fete in and of itself.

Give me a working prototype and I will believe it. Until then, I see this as just another misguided attempt to harness free energy.

Originally posted by Outlawstar
Ill tell you what we can do, e-mail the Orion Project NOW, they are in a unique position to be able to do somethng about this.

That's a thought! To me there's something a little weird about the Orion Project though. Like, Greer has named Bearden many times as one of the top "Free Energy" guys. And I just noticed that Bearden gives special thanks to Greer, and even "Emily Greer", his wife, at the end of "Energy from the Vacuum Part 1". So, obviously Bearden and Greer are pretty close friends.

Bearden already has a patented prototype - the MEG. (And Bedini already has many prototypes.) And yet, the Orion Project is always like "Gee, we're SO close to having a prototype to show the world, but we haven't quite found one yet, donate now to help us get there...."

Why isn't the MEG mentioned at the Orion Project anywhere?

Anyway - sorry, don't let me stop you from contacting TOP!

reply to post by GoldenAge


I am very sorry that I cannot maintain a neutral tone when responding to this.

This video bears all the typical signs of false energy device demonstrations that I have seen in other places. But those signs are subjective and I cannot hope to convince anyone purely on my opinion and professional judgment.

Demonstrating a rising voltage on the third battery is something anybody can do, as long as you don't take into consideration the dropping voltage on the other two, and the overall battery capacities and currents involved. Voltage alone does not represent energy or even power without also considering current.

Also, at one point in the video they say that "this motor only consumes three watts at 24 volts and about one amp????" 24 volts times one amp is 24 watts, not three. So there is some basic lack of technical competence that should raise some warning flags.

Here is the one argument that may be convincing: This motor has been supposedly demonstrated by recharging a third battery from the first two. If this motor really returned energy it would not require three batteries. In fact, it would require no batteries at all. Come on, think about it! why would batteries be required for a device that produces more energy that it consumes? a simple piece of wire or even a resistor could be replaced for the battery and there should be a positive voltage measured over that resistor as the supposed motor spins freely from its own energy, while turning a surplus to the resistor.

There is simply no reason why a battery would be needed even such contrived reasons as "to provide an initial something something" as is usually quoted in these videos.


It would run and simply spin an electric current on a piece of wire while returning all surplus energy to the environment as heat by agitating the air.

I am not going to say that it is impossible merely because of the second law of thermodynamics, I remain open minded enough that some phenomenon could in fact be discovered to circumvent that law, maybe something involving quantum effects... who knows....

But when it happens, it will be very obvious, it will not run on batteries. And yes, you and I won't hear about it.

-rrr

Originally posted by Darthorious
not if I can help it lol...

I just contacted a friend and going to see if we can get one of these built the video's give enough info to get started looking at it.

Ahhh, now THAT is the kind of initiative I was hoping to see! I'd love to see some of the more mechanically-talented members reproduce one of these!

reply to post by rickyrrr


Another interesting bit comes from the second part of the demonstration where the motor is powered by a power supply as they demonstrate its efficiency..

They quantify efficiency by the fact that it runs at a low current and high voltage.... notice that the motor is not *loaded* that is to say, is not actually moving anything like... a blender or an icecream machine.

So, yeah, the motor draws energy and is not producing any work... but yes, it is spinning at a high RPM.... while not pushing against anything but its own friction.

How about he demonstrates the motor *returning* a current to the power supply? show the power supply with a negative current value!

That would be over unity efficiency.

Another thing I find interesting is that they don't quote an efficiency ratio, like say... 0.9 or 1.1....

A good brushless motor can get about 0.8 efficiency (80% of the energy turned into motion and not heat or noise)

I would expect a free energy motor to have a number greater than one, like 1.01 or 1.5 or something....
well... why don't they quote this number and instead demonstrate at a particular power rating verus an RPM???? RPM is not power RPM multiplied by torque IS power.

I know I run the risk of been told that I am using *conventional* physics to understand this motor, but a motor that runs on unconventional physics must be able to power conventional machines to be useful, and conventional machines have conventional power consumption requirements, so this motor has to have conventional power output measurable in the conventional terms even if the principles behind it are unconventional. The motors efficiency rating is a fair question to ask and I would be very glad to see it clarified.

-rrr

Originally posted by rickyrrr
Here is the one argument that may be convincing: This motor has been supposedly demonstrated by recharging a third battery from the first two. If this motor really returned energy it would not require three batteries. In fact, it would require no batteries at all. Come on, think about it! why would batteries be required for a device that produces more energy that it consumes? a simple piece of wire or even a resistor could be replaced for the battery and there should be a positive voltage measured over that resistor as the supposed motor spins freely from its own energy, while turning a surplus to the resistor.

There is simply no reason why a battery would be needed even such contrived reasons as "to provide an initial something something" as is usually quoted in these videos.

My understanding is that for some reason you can't use the Radiant energy (or "Vacuum" energy, or "Scalar" energy) directly. You have to catch it and send it to a battery and the battery is what converts it to the form of energy that can power a load. So that is why these systems usually have at least two batteries - one running the motor and the other tapping the Radiant energy and charging itself up. (Bedini explains this much better in EFTV Part 2, you should watch it if you haven't already.)

We can sit and debate the merit of these systems, and indeed it has been done many times in many threads. But what I am saying is, the schematics for these are readily available now, so why not take it a step further and test it out for real? That is the ATS way, isn't it?

Originally posted by rickyrrr
That would be over unity efficiency.

Another thing I find interesting is that they don't quote an efficiency ratio, like say... 0.9 or 1.1....

A good brushless motor can get about 0.8 efficiency (80% of the energy turned into motion and not heat or noise)

I would expect a free energy motor to have a number greater than one, like 1.01 or 1.5 or something....

A distinction has to be made between Efficiency and COP. You can never have a system with 100% Efficiency or greater, but you can have systems with COP > 1. If you have a system that uses energy from some external source - the sun, the wind, geothermal, vacuum energy - then you can achieve COP > 1, but the system will still be less than 100% efficient.

These Keppe/Bearden/Bedini motors are designed to take maximum advantage of the vacuum/radiant energy and to have a very high COP, but they are still less than 100% efficient...

It would appear you have found an updated version of the old Perpetual Motion Machine Confidence Game. Brazil is an interesting place to conduct it from.

Source of the form page.

If you go through the site you will note it is not at all what you would expect. One of the other pages is a pitch for a book and it all links to "stop.org.br". That site is also to get into your wallet.

Don't fall for it. It is a shameless scam.

Edited to add - see last line in graphic -
If you don't send the money you will be causing the destruction of the world. Pull out that checkbook right now. Heck sell your house and send a nice cashiers check.

[edit on 10/28/2008 by Blaine91555]

reply to post by GoldenAge


I am all for demonstrating it. I have tried to construct other over unity devices before and have *NOT* succeeded.

But I welcome a demonstration. Any takers?

-rrr

Originally posted by GoldenAge

Originally posted by rickyrrr
That would be over unity efficiency.

Another thing I find interesting is that they don't quote an efficiency ratio, like say... 0.9 or 1.1....

A good brushless motor can get about 0.8 efficiency (80% of the energy turned into motion and not heat or noise)

I would expect a free energy motor to have a number greater than one, like 1.01 or 1.5 or something....

A distinction has to be made between Efficiency and COP. You can never have a system with 100% Efficiency or greater, but you can have systems with COP > 1. If you have a system that uses energy from some external source - the sun, the wind, geothermal, vacuum energy - then you can achieve COP > 1, but the system will still be less than 100% efficient.

These Keppe/Bearden/Bedini motors are designed to take maximum advantage of the vacuum/radiant energy and to have a very high COP, but they are still less than 100% efficient...

At some point the system has to *return* energy. whatever it does. If it is capturing energy from the environment and has a COP of over unity, but still an efficiency of under unity, whatever way you dice it or slice it, the extra energy has to be *somewhere*....

I'd like to see that energy across a pair of wires coming out of the device. Measurement in joules, and output energy has to be greater than the energy initially contained in the batteries that are part of the system combined with any rotational energy imparted into it to "crank it up". That is not too much to ask. Put energy somewhere *else* and then as a show of good faith show us it didn't come from your initial energy sources.

Fake free energy devices come and go every couple of years. You would think that they should be motivated to show themselves as different as possible from all the fakers out there, especially by showing in good faith that they have produced a net output.

-rrr