Nikola Tesla Unlimited Free Energy Forever [zero-point energy doco]

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

The fact is, if I had the choice between staying on the grid and paying for my energy, or buying a relatively small machine which could power my house for years without needing maintenance, I know damn well which option I am going to choose.

You make the assumption that said device is going to be small and affordable.

I can take your house off of the grid in a heartbeat with a simple modification to technology we used to use to pump water out of wells. It will only work in areas with relatively consistent winds, however - and will require between $35,000 and the limit of your fancy to do it.

Solid-state solar converters are available, with competent systems starting at about the same price range, but you will find effectiveness limited by latitude and weather conditions. It is also, not going to work to power your climate control systems if you have an above-ground house. ... Or, I suppose it can - but it makes no sense as it's going to constitute the vast majority of your power needs in both the summer and winter - which will increase the necessary size and capacity of your grid immensely.

And if the grid overlords wanted to have the slightest chance of keeping me on their grid they would have to make the cost of energy so ridiculously low that it compares to maintaining to own mini power generator.

Again, you make the assumption it is going to be small. The devices we use in an attempt to manipulate the vacuum state are immense. Lasers designed with the hope of "parting the foam" use incomprehensible amounts of energy focused on incredibly small spaces while consuming an entire laboratory's worth of power storage and regulation equipment. Even many of the designs mentioned in these types of threads will require facilities at least as large as a municipal power plant to even begin to generate the proposed effect to a measurable extent - let alone power anything.

There are two main "energy horizons" right now. The first is a long-lasting direct hydrocarbon-to-electric fuel cell (a sort of diesel engine of the fuel cell world). The second is a form of solid-state cold-fusion with the primary capture being a voltage potential (I envision this as a manipulation of crystalline structures - but whatever) - IE; a direct fusion-to-electric power source. In theory - such a device could be made to be small enough and with enough shielding to function as a power source for residences. It would, in all likelihood, not be cheap - not until manufacturing technologies allow them to be turned out like candy (which may very well happen before the technology is even developed).

Anyway - my point is that your position is predicated on the concept of you being able to buy a refrigerator sized Chest of Wonders for about the same price as a fancy stove.

Which... doesn't make any sense - since the technology you are wanting to invest in has literally no theory of operation and no real-world demonstrable values to even begin.

Call it want you want, it doesn't change the fact that the correct technical terminology is 'zero-point energy'. It's as simple as that.

It's not correct if it's wrong.

Just go fix me a cheeseburger. Hold the cheese.

ok? Do you understand that? Because that's simply how it is. Don't come back here until you can post irrefutable facts that counter what I've just said.

What you are trying to do is figure out how to make water at sea level rain down through 200 meters above sea level.

The sea level fluctuates - particularly on the small scale where waves reside both above and below the average of the system.

Zero point energy is, effectively, saying: "Yeah... there's an ocean full of stuff down there - but we can't do anything with it from up here unless we expend energy to bring it up."

Again - you're missing the forest for the trees.

Now THIS is interesting. This story is currently in the top thread list:

Yes, it is quite interesting - as it demonstrates a form of energy-to-particle conversion. This is going to be another huge area of research after it becomes impractical to carve out thousands of miles of land to house particle accelerators - we'll start turning to the creation of particles from the "quantum foam" and experiment that way (which will likely prove to yield far more in terms of advances).

The thing is, however, that these particles require an investment of energy to separate from the "quantum foam" - one that is at least equal to the mass and/or energy held by the particle generated.... so it kind of demonstrates what we've been talking about in regards to not being able to use Ground State Energy to net an energy gain.

anybody have a problem with the Joe Cell or GEET technology?

reply to post by Aim64C

You make the assumption that said device is going to be small and affordable.

No, I'm making the assumption it's going to be scalable. Most ideas can be scaled up or scaled down (there are mini nuclear reactors). But I'm also making the assumption it will be designed by a hobbyist engineer who is forced to start by making a small version because he doesn't have the money to make a massive power plant in his back yard. And we aren't talking about creating conditions comparable to the first moments of the Universe, we don't need massive lasers or particle accelerators. We want to subtly exploit a quantum phenomena, not directly manipulate it using extreme brute force.

The thing is, however, that these particles require an investment of energy to separate from the "quantum foam" - one that is at least equal to the mass and/or energy held by the particle generated.... so it kind of demonstrates what we've been talking about in regards to not being able to use Ground State Energy to net an energy gain.

I realize that, but it just goes to show that the vacuum energy is really there and can be excited into manifestation. For all those people trying to debate the existence of it (not you), this is pretty conclusive evidence, along with all the other experiments which demonstrate that it must exist.

I realize that in this case it seems more like they are converting energy into photons, so they aren't really getting anything. However, I do still believe it's possible to use the vacuum energy in a way which doesn't expend as much energy as it costs to harness it. I believe it has something to do with resonation, you need to match the frequency of the 'ZPE Aether' so it stimulates some sort of natural process wherein the 'radiant energy' bleeds into the system and provides over-unity. I believe something similar is happening with Dr. Jones' circuit.

reply to post by cupocoffee

That Mythbusters segment was the only time the Bedini motor was ever addressed on TV - and Bedini himself wasn't even there to ensure that they conducted the test properly??

Is there some kind of precedent for this? You state it as though it is some kind of outlandish behavior.

john_b, can you PROVE, with evidence, that the Mythbusters conducted the test properly?

Since you're such a big fan of this guy - let's start with the specifications for the motor. What are they?

From there, we can use both basic and advanced film analysis to determine whether or not the device was built according to the specifications.

A proper test is pretty simple. Set it up as per instruction and attempt to operate it as per instruction. If it doesn't work - you're missing something: A) a critical assembly step, B) a critical operating step, C) a functioning device.

If Not A and Not B, then C.

Besides, many, many other independent parties have also replicated Bedini motors besides Mythbusters.

. . . Who?

What about all of Bedini's supporters in the Yahoo group, and on sites like Peswiki and overunity.com, who claim that they have done the experiments and replicated the technology and it does work?

So, where are the working Bedini devices?

Do you have any clue what someone with a modicum of business sense could do with something like that?

They are all in on the scam too, I suppose?

Do they even exist? Are they real people?

We deal with smurfs and spoofs all the time here on ATS - to include downright forgeries with a nefarious intent.

So, quite bluntly, I really don't care about the accounts of people. All I care about is whether or not the machine can function as it is described. In the case of this machine - it has never once demonstrated this functionality.

By the way - from what I've seen of the Bedini motors - there can't be any specific plans for the thing. The Bedini motors I've seen have an incredible array of physical and electrical variations - some not even being able to be called the same device.

Yet most of these all claim success with the design - despite the fact that, in most cases, the designs are so varied as to be mutually exclusive - IE - if one functions, the others can't, by virtue of the differences.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

No, I'm making the assumption it's going to be scalable.

Scaling does not often work too well.

Yes, we have "mini" nuclear reactors - nuclear submarines possessing about the smallest ones -possible-. They become very inefficient at smaller sizes (although the core size is not necessarily the largest part) - as there is less mass to absorb the neutron emissions (that trigger further fission events).

Putting nuclear reactors in cars, while an entertaining concept - is only practical in terms of portable reactors that could be dedicated to an entire tractor-trailer.

We want to subtly exploit a quantum phenomena, not directly manipulate it using extreme brute force.

You have to find something to exploit, first. And you can't really exploit quantum fluctuations in the way you want to. Even if you could - you are looking at very low energy potentials - you would need to capture the variance out of many cubic meters of vacuum space at a very high yield (IE - capturing as many as possible) to even begin to generate power that could be useable.

However, I do still believe it's possible to use the vacuum energy in a way which doesn't expend as much energy as it costs to harness it. I believe it has something to do with resonation, you need to match the frequency of the 'ZPE Aether' so it stimulates some sort of natural process wherein the 'radiant energy' bleeds into the system and provides over-unity. I believe something similar is happening with Dr. Jones' circuit.

Honestly - we hardly know anything about it.

I understand where you are coming from - but manipulating this is likely going to be well beyond garage engineering (unless you happen to have a very high-tech garage outfitted for prototyping pre-market stuff).

Personally - I think some interesting things will happen if we are able to force a region of space to violate Planck energy maximums - perhaps something that could generate an over-unity return (though to what degree, and how one would go about harnessing it... I don't know). .... Or just make a really big bang with exotic particle radiation showering all over the place. Either one would be quite fun.

That Mythbusters segment was the only time the Bedini motor was ever addressed on TV - and Bedini himself wasn't even there to ensure that they conducted the test properly??

Originally posted by Aim64C
Is there some kind of precedent for this? You state it as though it is some kind of outlandish behavior.

So conducting a test of a technology on national TV without the actual inventor present, to ensure that the device is built and tested properly, that makes logical sense to you?

How can a test be a valid test if the inventor himself isn't even present and has no way to ensure that it is a valid test?

Besides, many, many other independent parties have also replicated Bedini motors besides Mythbusters.

. . . Who?

I told you already. Bedini has a large number of supporters, in the Yahoo groups, and on sites like peswiki.com and overunity.com .

You seriously think that every single one of them are smurfs and spoofs and fake accounts?

He has the support of Bearden, who is an army colonel and nuclear physicist.

His associate Rick Friedrich actually started out as a member of New Energy Congress. After replicating Bedini's models, Friedrich dropped everything and moved his family so that he could work with Bedini full time.

So, where are the working Bedini devices?

In the Yahoo groups, which no one here has ever bothered to join?

All over Youtube?

All I care about is whether or not the machine can function as it is described. In the case of this machine - it has never once demonstrated this functionality.

How can you possibly know that for 100% sure? You have never tested one yourself!

reply to post by Aim64C

even if you could - you are looking at very low energy potentials - you would need to capture the variance out of many cubic meters of vacuum space at a very high yield (IE - capturing as many as possible) to even begin to generate power that could be useable.

You obviously haven't looked up how much vacuum energy exists within one cubic meter of space at any one time - check the Guinness Book of World Records, it's in there as the most abundant energy or something like that. Not to mention the vacuum is constantly replenishing its self with virtual particles.

I understand where you are coming from - but manipulating this is likely going to be well beyond garage engineering (unless you happen to have a very high-tech garage outfitted for prototyping pre-market stuff).

Of course it goes beyond garage engineering, it probably involves phenomena which goes to the very heart of reality. But you don't need to understand exactly how it works to make it work, it's all about experimentation and tinkering. Even Tesla pronounced his belief in this free radiant energy source about 100 years ago. He also claimed that he had found a way to tap into this free energy source, and it was all about resonation.

It's no wonder then that the FBI/CIA raided his lab after he died and ILLEGALLY confiscated all his research material without permission from his friends or family, to whom it belonged. My intuition tells me that vacuum energy is strongly linked to the source of everything in the Universe. In fact some inflation theories state that vacuum energy is directly responsible for the formation of the Universe.

ChaoticOrder and others,

You wrote:
Of course it goes beyond garage engineering, it probably involves phenomena which goes to the very heart of reality. But you don't need to understand exactly how it works to make it work, it's all about experimentation and tinkering. Even Tesla pronounced his belief in this free radiant energy source about 100 years ago. He also claimed that he had found a way to tap into this free energy source, and it was all about resonation.

Aronolac: Getting a device to work by someone tinkering in the garage is most doable and affordable. If my learned friends would stop to consider that this energy is an effect of several causes that can be duplicated in a garage. Zero energy is a by-product, and the by-product can be manufactured in a garage to run a water purifier or a train, but you have to understand how to get the energy to flow by providing the right catalyst.

You wrote:
It's no wonder then that the FBI/CIA raided his lab after he died and ILLEGALLY confiscated all his research material without permission from his friends or family, to whom it belonged. My intuition tells me that vacuum energy is strongly linked to the source of everything in the Universe. In fact some inflation theories state that vacuum energy is directly responsible for the formation of the Universe.

Aronolac: Your last statement in particular has more meaning than you know. The universe is a system with two integrated systems coordinated by design. Formation of the universe is not fully understood by anyone, but any person who wishes to know more about how it runs has to get grip on how energy emerges into space. That will allow more discoveries. In fact, it is a leap of understanding to even postulate the universe as having space before the big bang and that energy was seeping into space even before there was any materialization of atomic matter. For one thing, zero point energy is the evidence-effect space temperature has on pre-material force and is responsible for that which precipitates atomic particles like seeds into the rich soil of self-creation.

To have a serious discussion among us there has to be a desire to escape the fetters of present thinking about the nature of energy and universe expansion in spite of how scary that may be to some. Otherwise, formation of the universe theories will continue to miss the points that must be taken up to perceive the cosmos as it actually regulates itself.

reply to post by cupocoffee

So conducting a test of a technology on national TV without the actual inventor present, to ensure that the device is built and tested properly, that makes logical sense to you?

You misunderstand my point.

Why is it necessary, if one purchases a set of "do it yourself" schematics from someone instructing you how to build a machine, for the inventor to be called in to explain how to properly build the device? Is that not what the customer pays for, his instructions?

Thus, if one builds such a device - as per the instructions they were told would allow them to create a machine that does x and/or y... and then tests the device to see if it functions in accordance with the advertising... the inventor is not really a necessary step in the process... until you get into trouble-shooting, at which point - his level of success is then measured by how quickly and accurately he can diagnose and correct the problem.

How can a test be a valid test if the inventor himself isn't even present and has no way to ensure that it is a valid test?

You, really, don't understand the concept of peer review, do you?

I told you already. Bedini has a large number of supporters, in the Yahoo groups, and on sites like peswiki.com and overunity.com .

No, you told me there were a lot of supporters. I asked who.

I'm not asking for their birth certificate or list of lovers, here - a plain and simple "who?"

You seriously think that every single one of them are smurfs and spoofs and fake accounts?

There's never a shortage of naive stupidity, and those willing to capitalize upon it.

He has the support of Bearden, who is an army colonel and nuclear physicist.

Meh.

I've met plenty of O-6s. Not really swayed one way or the other. I also know plenty of nuclear physicists and we all regard each other as peers in the area of academics. So, again - not really wowed.

His associate Rick Friedrich actually started out as a member of New Energy Congress. After replicating Bedini's models, Friedrich dropped everything and moved his family so that he could work with Bedini full time.

Good for him.

In the Yahoo groups, which no one here has ever bothered to join?

All over Youtube?

I asked for functional Bedini devices. This does not satisfy the requirement.

A functional Bedini device would be able to:
-charge, fully, several large batteries from a single small battery.
-demonstrate, functionally, this over-unity phenomena in a practical application.

And not just in YouTube videos and "Hey guys, it really works!" forum comments. Why would any sane individual stop with one or two of these devices, if they really worked? You'd never need to buy batteries again, except for when the others chemically erode or you need to expand your stock. Forget wall outlets - battery power everything.

How can you possibly know that for 100% sure? You have never tested one yourself!

I've seen the contraptions people have built and claimed to be Bedini generators. The circuits used, and the configurations they are in, are not at all uncommon or unprecedented. Calculating power for these circuits is an exercise in calculus and precise measurements and sampling intervals with the proper tools (that are not cheap). The addition of batteries - not built to a high degree of precision (in terms of real power storage capacity) - simply adds more complexity and ambiguity to the entire mix.

Basically, until you take one battery and charge up two batteries to full power, those two to four, and so on, until you can then operate an R/C car as though those batteries were full for the expected life of the charge (at least several minutes - far more power than is in any single cell of those batteries) .... you really have not tested the device (or similarly demonstrated that it somehow generates more energy than is put in with practical applications).

Then, I'll want to see it done in person.

These scams can work because of the curiosity factor. The machine doesn't have to work to make money - it just has to pique your interest enough to get you to buy the plans/kit.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

You obviously haven't looked up how much vacuum energy exists within one cubic meter of space at any one time - check the Guinness Book of World Records, it's in there as the most abundant energy or something like that. Not to mention the vacuum is constantly replenishing its self with virtual particles.

*sigh*

"You are trying to make it rain from the ocean to 200 feet above sea level."

It doesn't matter if you have a planet made entirely out of water with several thousand times the mass of Earth - it is only the water in the clouds that can rain down upon you.

The absolute best you can hope for is to 'skim the waves' off of the fluctuations. Considering that the 'surface' of the ground-state is going to likely vary somewhat between two geometrically local points, it is not outside the realm of possibility that one could 'short' the two points and net some energy via some phenomena. Not unlike how water will sill evaporate even when all ambient surroundings are just above freezing.

And, as you may be able to guess... the 'waves' do not hold near as much potential as the ocean they slide across. Arguably - those 'waves' are what make up our existence - which kind of negates the point of discussing fluctuations in the ground state (as all particles/waves can be presumed to be at the ground state for the given spatial conditions...)

Even Tesla pronounced his belief in this free radiant energy source about 100 years ago. He also claimed that he had found a way to tap into this free energy source, and it was all about resonation.

Tesla... is a man I can empathize with. The problem is that Tesla started to get a little whacky towards the end. One can understand why - he was not a very good business man, or business partner. He burned a lot of bridges with those backing his endeavors, financially, and was not really all that great at making a sales pitch (IE - why should we buy your lighting globe of kill?). He began to watch a lot of people pull funding for his projects and began making wild claims in an attempt to drum up more interest and support.

Now, he would likely be diagnosed with an autism-spectrum disorder. Many of us fall into this category - while never clinically diagnosed - I do have a number of traits in common with those who have Asperger's Syndrome (which is probably not too far off from Tesla). Anyway - the man was watching his life's passion and dreams crumble before him - and he acted in a number of irrational ways that only further damaged him.

It's no wonder then that the FBI/CIA raided his lab after he died and ILLEGALLY confiscated all his research material without permission from his friends or family, to whom it belonged.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Tesla and some of his theories may have been quite out there - but many of his devices hit on a level of function that could not be ignored. Further, and more pertinent - it is often best you discover there was nothing of use than to wonder if anyone (foreign interests/enemies) was able to find a use....

It's not the ideal thing - but the logic is undeniable.

My intuition tells me that vacuum energy is strongly linked to the source of everything in the Universe. In fact some inflation theories state that vacuum energy is directly responsible for the formation of the Universe.

That's all fine and dandy. But that doesn't really give us much direction on how to go about building our own ground-state energy devices.

Originally posted by Aim64C
You misunderstand my point.

Why is it necessary, if one purchases a set of "do it yourself" schematics from someone instructing you how to build a machine, for the inventor to be called in to explain how to properly build the device? Is that not what the customer pays for, his instructions?

Because this was not just any test, this is a test that was broadcast out to the world on national TV!

You seriously don't see why the actual inventor would want to be present at such a test, to ensure that the testers were actually doing everything right and not merely producing a hatchet job?

If you don't get this, explaining it to you over and over again isn't going to help. I think you and john_b are just being purposely obtuse here.

Have you actually watched the segment, BTW? The Mythbusters were obviously biased right from the start. Their body language was cocky and arrogant and exaggerated, they were cracking jokes the entire time; clearly they weren't actually taking their work seriously.

They were told to produce a hatchet job, and that's what they did.

You, really, don't understand the concept of peer review, do you?

That's what the Yahoo group is for. People join the group, they are given a schematic, they build the device and report their results. If they are successful with that, they are given a schematic for a more advanced model, they build and test that and report their results, and so on.

The Yahoo group, which you and everyone else here refuse to join....

Why do they sell a "Free Energy Circuits and Schematics" book? Surely not to get people building things and doing peer review?

Why do they sell open-source kits with all the parts and instructions? It couldn't be for peer review....

No, you told me there were a lot of supporters. I asked who.

I'm not asking for their birth certificate or list of lovers, here - a plain and simple "who?"

Do your own research. Join the Yahoo group and find out. Or go to overunity.com and talk to the people there.

I asked for functional Bedini devices. This does not satisfy the requirement.

A functional Bedini device would be able to:
-charge, fully, several large batteries from a single small battery.
-demonstrate, functionally, this over-unity phenomena in a practical application.

And not just in YouTube videos and "Hey guys, it really works!" forum comments.

Okay, good, now you're on the right track.

So suppose, hypothetically, that a member of ATS has a working overunity device. A Bedini motor - or some other design or technology.

He's built it, he's tested it extensively, he's proven to himself that it does work.

Suppose that member then wants to prove his device to the rest of us.

How should that member go about doing that? What sort of evidence could that member show us that would actually be convincing for a majority of the members here?

Post a video up on Youtube? No, hundreds of people have already done that, that's not considered sufficient proof.

Post all the test results and data? No, the debunkers will simply accuse him of measuring it wrong, or doing the tests wrong, or posting false made-up data. They can always find ways to say the evidence isn't good enough and raise the bar higher.

So, Youtube videos and testing data aren't good enough proof. So, what then?

What sort of evidence could such a member show that would actually be convincing for a majority of the members here?

Basically, until you take one battery and charge up two batteries to full power, those two to four, and so on, until you can then operate an R/C car as though those batteries were full for the expected life of the charge (at least several minutes - far more power than is in any single cell of those batteries) .... you really have not tested the device (or similarly demonstrated that it somehow generates more energy than is put in with practical applications).

Then, I'll want to see it done in person.

Good point, seeing is believing!

People don't want to believe all the evidence on the internet......... until they actually try it themselves, and see it in person!

reply to post by cupocoffee


Since you obviously have no idea what an independent peer review is, and why it is important to NOT have the inventor there, I suggest you read up on the definition. I've kindy supplied it for you:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Now, I'll make it easy for you. If you invent something and claim it works, the only thing people have to go on is your word. Who's to say you aren't lieing for profit, just like Bedini? It's a good thing to use your head and not believe everything people tell you. Coming to conclusions through scientific process is always best.

reply to post by nightbringr


nightbringr, anyone in the world can do their own independent review of the technology.

That's what the Yahoo group is for! And the "Circuits and Schematics" books!

They even sell kits with all the parts and instructions, to make it as easy as possible for people to build and test their own device.

What more can they reasonably be expected to do?

Originally posted by cupocoffee
reply to post by nightbringr

 

nightbringr, anyone in the world can do their own independent review of the technology.

That's what the Yahoo group is for! And the "Circuits and Schematics" books!

They even sell kits with all the parts and instructions, to make it as easy as possible for people to build and test their own device.

What more can they reasonably be expected to do?

So let's back this up a second.

First you complain MythBusters did not have the inventor there, so obviously it wasn't a fair review. Then you state since the schematics are available online so anyone can do their own review and come to their own conclusions. So, since this is exactly what that MythBuster people did, you suddenly disapprove? Is it jus the Mythbuster people you don't like? If I did the review at home and came to the same conclusion as the mythbuster people, would you claim I did the test erroneously and needed Bedini with me?

Again, please read the article I posted to you showing the importance of independent peer review on scientific discoveries and advancement. It will help you understand.

reply to post by nightbringr


nightbringr, anyone in the world can do their own independent review.

But, obviously, anyone in the world can also do a hatchet job. Anyone can make a video and go "look, I'm an engineering expert, I built a Bedini motor, and look, it doesn't work!". Anyone can do what Mythbusters did.

It's real easy to make a video attacking someone when he isn't even there to defend himself, isn't it?

It's obvious to me from the way they behave in the video that it was a hatchet job. But if you don't want to believe that, that's fine.

This is the whole reason why Bedini has the Yahoo group - to find the people who actually have a legitimate interest and who want to actually build something that works. To separate out the serious people from the shills and debunkers, and have all the real people in one place.

You keep talking about the importance of independent review, well I agree with you, it is important. But look, ATS members have never done their own independent review!

All that's necessary to do an independent review is to join the Yahoo group or order a kit, but no one from ATS has ever tried.

And that's why no one at ATS has something that works yet! Because no one tries. No one investigates it for themselves, everybody just relies on the Mythbusters clowns to tell them what's real and what's not....

reply to post by cupocoffee

everyone just jumps to the conclusion that it doesn't work, because of things like the Mythbusters hatchet job
...
The MythBusters hatchet job was done without even consulting with Bedini and without his permission, and they didn't even build the device properly, so of course it didn't work.
...
Mythbusters did not consult with him, they did not ask his permission, and they did not build their device properly to his specifications.
...
the Mythbusters were paid to produce a hatchet job
...
What if they didn't build and test it properly? What if they were paid to produce a hatchet job to broadcast to the world?
...
The Mythbusters were obviously biased right from the start. Their body language was cocky and arrogant and exaggerated, they were cracking jokes the entire time; clearly they weren't actually taking their work seriously.
...
They were told to produce a hatchet job, and that's what they did.

Looks like someone has got an agenda here.

Why do they sell a "Free Energy Circuits and Schematics" book?

Why do they sell open-source kits with all the parts and instructions?

To make money?

No one has ever tried actually buying the book to see if the circuits and schematics in it work.

No one has ever bought one of the open-source kits and assembled it to see if that works.

They even sell kits with all the parts and instructions, to make it as easy as possible for people to build and test their own device.

If it actually worked they wouldn't have to sell all this books and kits.

It is the modus operandi of the scam that you ignore for whatever reason!

That's the classic scammer tactic. You can't sell the final "product" as you would be done for fraud and false advertising so instead you sell the parts + instructions and blame the customer when it inevitably doesn't work.

reply to post by Aim64C

Tesla... is a man I can empathize with. The problem is that Tesla started to get a little whacky towards the end.

The man is single handedly responsible for pushing us into the electronic era. AC electricity, brushless AC generators, wireless power transmission, wireless communication, radio-controlled devices, x-ray technology, laser and radar technology, the list goes on and on. He even did research into radiation which led to setting up the basic formulation of cosmic rays. Yet the first thing you do is attack the mans sanity, ABSOLUTELY TYPICAL. He was talking about radiant energy long before he was old and senile.

That's all fine and dandy. But that doesn't really give us much direction on how to go about building our own ground-state energy devices.

That's exactly why it's all about experimentation and tinkering. It doesn't matter how much you try to tell me energy can't come from nothing, your speculation is meaningless because science doesn't know enough about the nature of reality to begin with. You are trying to tell me these concepts are too advanced to make it work, yet at the same time are trying to explain to me how it can't be done, when in actuality you have no idea whether it can REALLY be done or not. Neither do I, but there's lots of reason to believe it might be possible, and I'm damn well going to try. When I think about all the energy in the Universe I can't believe that it was simply here all a long. When I ask people where God came from they tell he he/her/it was simply there all along. It's NOT a valid answer. It's completely illogical!

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

It doesn't matter how much you try to tell me energy can't come from nothing, your speculation is meaningless because science doesn't know enough about the nature of reality to begin with.

No. The problem is that you clearly don't understand what energy is. Energy is the capacity do do work! You could have an infinite amount of energy in a single point of space, it still won't get you anywhere if you can't transform it into a lower state. ZPE, vacuum energy or whatever you might call it is per definition the lowest achievable state. This means you can not do work with it.

This is what people have tried to explain to you for nine pages now and you still don't(or don't want to) understand this very basic concept.

reply to post by moebius

No. The problem is that you clearly don't understand what energy is. Energy is the capacity do do work! You could have an infinite amount of energy in a single point of space, it still won't get you anywhere if you can't transform it into a lower state. ZPE, vacuum energy or whatever you might call it is per definition the lowest achievable state. This means you can not do work with it.

You sir are just blabbering nonsense. Every form of energy can be used to do work. Any amount of electrical energy can be used to do work. Any amount of solar energy can be used to do work. Any amount of kinetic energy can be used to do work. Any amount of thermal energy can be used to do work. The question is not if vacuum energy can be used to do work, the question is whether you can get the vacuum energy for free, or for little cost. Scientists recently showed that it is possible to extract photons from the vacuum, and those photons could be converted into electricity using the simple photoelectric effect.

However, in that experiment, the amount of energy it cost to excite the virtual particles into manifestation was far beyond the amount of energy they pulled from the vacuum. ZPE generators essentially require the ability to tap into that vacuum energy without expending much energy. There are many possible ways this might be done, most theories involve the use of certain frequencies and resonation with the ZPE field, it really is beyond my ability to properly understand, but I'm certainly not going to give up just because I don't understand it 100%.

Originally posted by moebius
Looks like someone has got an agenda here.

My "agenda" is simply to point out that schematics from Bedini and his supporters have been freely available for years, and no one at ATS has ever given them a fair chance.

That might be why no one here has a working overunity device yet

Everyone points to the Mythbusters debunk as proof that the motors don't work. It doesn't occur to anyone that they might have had a hidden agenda?

People accuse Bedini and his supporters of having a hidden agenda, people accuse me of having a hidden agenda, but somehow the Mythbusters are absolutely above reproach? Everything they say should just be taken as gospel without question?

Why do they sell a "Free Energy Circuits and Schematics" book?

Why do they sell open-source kits with all the parts and instructions?

To make money?

Why do you automatically assume the worst?

What if they sell books and kits, because the motors work and they want people to try building them?

If it actually worked they wouldn't have to sell all this books and kits.

More assumptions.

If mainstream science refuses to acknowledge that the technology works, then the Yahoo group and the books and kits are the next best way to get the information out and get as many people as possible working with the technology.