Hi Gary, Others,

Open your eyes please before you start telling the world how wonderful something
is.

The Schoolgirl motor ran for 5 days at a school science fair each day it ran for
5 hours and its stated draw was 19 or 20 ma or there abouts.

First you need to do the basic maths and see how much power it uses in 25 hours
and then you simply need to track down a battery company on the net and find out
what the 9 volt battery contained.

To save you time let me simply tell you because I actually took the time to do
this at 20ma that's 100 ma a day and 500 ma for the week so how much in one of
these batteries, well I guess it will surprise you to learnt that there is in
fact 595ma in a average 9 volt battery, so if the motor had run for a couple of
days more maybe and I really do mean maybe it would have been something to write
home about, you see manufacturing companies have to make sure their product is
fit for its purpose on most countries and so to say that the battery has 595ma
in it means that they need a margin for error.

Its a bit like going to the supermarket and buying potatoes, the bag can be as
much overweight as you like but it is not allowed to be a gram underweight.

So there you have it, what is amazing is not the motor running for so long at
all but how many people don't believe this is possible and so it must be
something special, when science and a bit of maths and the appropriate data tell
the truth.

Bedini, like a lot of others, simply jumped on the free publicity from this and
tried to use it to his advantage, same as Don jumping in here spouting claims of
anti Lenz in his motor when we were discussing mine earlier.

Other Bedini stuff has merit but this one is just plain lack of understanding
which hopefully I have corrected here, but please do follow this up yourselves
and see for yourselves.


Garry Stanley

Cable.net.nz

Hi All,

In all my test using a known good battery operating in the 50-100%
charge window, I can find no OU while using pulse charging supplied
by a simple low power Bedini or Ossie style charger.

I also find that the devices do not charge 2 batteries in parallel as
fast as one device. The voltage and Sp. gravity rate of change is
halved when using two batteries on the output in my test.

If you destroy a battery by discharging it below recommended levels
down to zero volts (actually below 50%) and make a secondary battery
act as a primary battery, you will for few cycles appear to have a
small amount of OU. In the long run after 3-5 cycles, you end up with
a boat anchor and no useful power. The only excess power is from the
battery, as it is dying NOT from the charger.

In a 5-day test of cycling the batteries from input to output every
24 hours, the final outcome was already apparent. I had planned a 7-
day test but terminated it in 5 days when I accidentally blew the
charger Triac (damn test leads, shaky fingers). The test was simply
running one battery into another through an Ossie Turbo for 24 hours
and then reversing the batteries. BOTH batteries were loosing
absolute charge shown by voltage AND Specific Gravity readings.

This is the true test of an OU battery type system. The batteries are
charged open loop but then fed back through/into the system long
term. ALL calculations are done in the batteries. If they charge up,
it works, if they do no, it does not. In my case, it did not. To say
otherwise is to live in a fantasy world.

I am not saying that the "systems" do not work, I will just say that
I was not able to get them to work. Maybe I don't have the magic,
the "Mojo". This is what I have found.

In my opinion, the Ossie Turbo and the Bedini solid state circuit are
basically the same device. I have a hunch John will disagree. If he
does, I will not argue with him. I can simply say that both circuits
show amazingly similar results when fed into GOOD batteries.



A few observations are in order.

At times I had "measured" COP's of 1.7/1. I later found that this
was measurement errors. It took a couple of weeks to refine the
measurements of current and voltage both in and out of the chargers
and the batteries. You can NOT use a meter on the output side of the
circuits to measure the output current. The frequency and waveform
is not usable to a standard DVM or Vane types meter. Input
measurements with a DVM measuring current is close but then too,
there is an error due to the square wave nature of the waveform or
current draw on the input side.

The most accurate way to measure input current is across a very small
resistance (0.1 ohm, carbon resistor) on a scope and then calculates
power draw in the circuit. Of course duty cycle of the waveforms has
to be taken into account. Newer digital scopes will do it for you.
I do not have the luxury of a 5-8K dollar scope so I have to use my
wits and eyeballs.

Discharging the battery is fairly simple. Any 1-3 amp 78LXX series
regulator can be placed on a heat sink and with one resistor become a
constant current sink device thereby giving you a very accurate power
drain on the batteries. Of course, you can't drain the battery down
to 0.0 volts as to do that is a no win situation! This
produces "Dead" Batteries permanently.

You must accept the fact that this style of energy device does NO
work. Trying to say this device does work is incorrect. If it is
doing work, it has to be exerting force over distance and it
obviously is NOT what a solid state circuit does! It is producing
power, which COULD do work if applied to a mechanical device.

It has current going from a battery into the charger and then into a
battery. This is simply calculated in WATTS, in or out. Normally we
calculate this in watt-hours. To open up the numbers we can convert
the watts in or out of the device into JOULES when used in the
correct definition of Joules as used in a dissipative circuit. Where
1 watt (P=EI) equal 1 Joule/second/ 360 Joules/min or 3600
Joules/hour.

I am sure others will duplicate these circuits. The only
test/results I will accept as genuine is the long-term 2-battery test
as described above. If it does not continue to run indefinitely, it
is bogus. It meets all the criteria of an open loop system and also
tests the total power produced in that system. It is simply a "self"
test for OU!

If the systems are creating real power, it will run forever. If the
temporary excess power is in the chemical effect of the battery
dying, then it will not. That is all.

Personally, I will say that the above is not what I had hoped to
find. I really wanted to believe. It is a real downer for me right
now. Frackaty Frackaty FRackaty!

On to the Aspden Patent!


Ben K4ZEP