Monopole Magnets

[Tom C]

Erfinder
you and I have not seen eye to eye on a few things, and that is alright. I am speaking about a specific machine and it's function and what the magnets are for. the fact that you can run the monopole circuit in solid state (no magnets just forced oscillation) is proof that is not designed as a GENERATOR if you load it down the way it is built, it slows down then stops. a generator consists of a prime mover of some kind and then windings and a stator that generates electricity to power loads. the generator action of the core and trigger is al it is there for. you need to be careful here, telling people its a generator, and saying there is a generator action are 2 different things.

if you want the wheel to power loads by means of rotational torque off the SG then go ahead use neo magnets, change the coil configuration, change the power source and add your pulleys and whizbangs. the window motor would do you a lot better as a prime mover to spin a muller gen type arrangement. as a matter of fact build a muller dynamo like romero uk did and off to the races you go. there are thousands of replications and different ways to work once you understand the basic machine, including yours, which no one can replicate because they do not have your understanding of your circuit and its topology and which you refuse to share. so please tell us EXACTLY how you do it share with everyone please, how you use neo's in your circuit and how you stack them, your coil topology and wiring, and how you and when and where to switch.

the peanut gallery is waiting for YOU to shar! you my friend are not the peanut gallery you are one who has claimed to have found "IT" so rather than complain about it not being shared, open up your secrets to the peanut gallery and let them judge the merits of your discovery.

just to be clear you said:

"I do accept the arguments against the use of Neos in designs that are presented by the inventor" what the hell else am I talking about? don't use neo's in the vanilla SG. that is what was being asked about not anything else.

so show us how you do it, the world will be forever grateful,,,

Tom C

[Tom C]

Erfinder,

please start a new thread, and then go thru your last post and show step by step how you have modified the circuit and changed things to produce each effect you have stated and gotten to where you are at....

Tom C

[Lman]

The only time I have heard John Bedini saying he could or might use Neodimium magnets is in DVD 25 where the trigger winding is independent coil. And than he would be adjusting the space between the magnets and the trigger coil.
The only machine John showed us using Neodimium magnets was the Zero Force Motor. But that is a different machine.
NEVER Neos in the monopole.

Tom C, I think your post #74 should be in red and be put as a sticky somewhere. I have the strange feeling that we will see that question about the magnets again

Regards
Lman

[erfinder]

Erfinder
you and I have not seen eye to eye on a few things, and that is alright. I am speaking about a specific machine and it's function and what the magnets are for. the fact that you can run the monopole circuit in solid state (no magnets just forced oscillation) is proof that is not designed as a GENERATOR if you load it down the way it is built, it slows down then stops. a generator consists of a prime mover of some kind and then windings and a stator that generates electricity to power loads. the generator action of the core and trigger is al it is there for. you need to be careful here, telling people its a generator, and saying there is a generator action are 2 different things.

You are right Tom, we don't agree on many things, and this is alright. I didn't make the post to get into a pissing contest with you or anyone else. I'm sure you know full well that I know you were describing a specific machine and its function. Lets not play that game. The fact that you can run a monopole circuit in solid state is not proof that its not designed as a generator, for here we are still capitalizing on effects associated with changing fields! My motor generators are also designed to reduce their consumption when loaded mechanically, we don't need to get into why my system does this, but I will say that I was inspired by the SG, the difference is I get the exact same behavior without the inductive trigger. This drop in consumption when mechanically loaded is not to be brushed off, it is significant. The device shouldn't stop when you apply the proper impedance, proper here doesn't extend to mechanical loading. The circuit should be allowed to match on its own, something that the SG also does to a certain degree. I have noted that a device can drop to a crawl in RPM, along with its consumption, but will not stop, another key point to look for, heaviest load possible for least consumption, the reverse of what we are instructed to look for. There is more than one type of generator action to consider, in the rotor based setup you have two to consider, in the solid state system one.

You state that "a generator consists of a prime mover of some kind and then windings and stator that generates electricity to power loads." First, in my view, motors are generators and generators are motors, this is the basic premise. This perspective is important for it lays the foundation for how we can view generators "motors" in the future. Upon closer examination, we find that there is no such thing as a motor, what we have can be summed up as being a "powered generator". An electricity producing apparatus which is forced to produce a mechanical output. The thing which is well established in the literature, but often forgotten by the researcher, is that the device never stops functioning as a generator, and it matters little how you have the device configured. Another problem that I have noted is that we see the generated as an output instead of what it is. The mechanism responsible for the induced potential is there to limit current. Your motor is a generator and always is a generator, it has an electrical output which we call BEMF, this electrical output is directed against the supply. We are told that the BEMF cannot exceed the applied and this is simply not true. The induced can be made to exceed the applied and I have demonstrated this on more than one occasion. If you didn't see that, its not my problem Tom. I don't need to be careful, you need to be careful, the device is a generator, as I stated, not a very good one but a generator nonetheless. That is how I see it, and I am calling it like I see it. The facts don't lie, and common sense goes a long way in situations like these..

if you want the wheel to power loads by means of rotational torque off the SG then go ahead use neo magnets, change the coil configuration, change the power source and add your pulleys and whizbangs. the window motor would do you a lot better as a prime mover to spin a muller gen type arrangement. as a matter of fact build a muller dynamo like romero uk did and off to the races you go. there are thousands of replications and different ways to work once you understand the basic machine, including yours, which no one can replicate because they do not have your understanding of your circuit and its topology and which you refuse to share. so please tell us EXACTLY how you do it share with everyone please, how you use neo's in your circuit and how you stack them, your coil topology and wiring, and how you and when and where to switch.

Your first few words contain all the proof that I need that you have no idea what you are talking about, nor do you comprehend what I am saying. I want the consumption to drop when the proper impedance is added, just like we note in the SG. It's sad that you don't comprehend what this symbolizes.

There are thousands of replications of devices and concepts that have brought us nothing. I am not into wasting my time or that of my fellow researcher. The fact that one guy, and I love that guy for it, got the effects I shared through his own effort is proof that more than enough information was provided. You didn't get it, that's your problem, not mine. Each and every question that you ask was answered time and time again, you want a blueprint, and that's just not going to happen, not sure if it would do you any good to have one anyway.

the peanut gallery is waiting for YOU to shar! you my friend are not the peanut gallery you are one who has claimed to have found "IT" so rather than complain about it not being shared, open up your secrets to the peanut gallery and let them judge the merits of your discovery.

just to be clear you said:

"I do accept the arguments against the use of Neos in designs that are presented by the inventor" what the hell else am I talking about? don't use neo's in the vanilla SG. that is what was being asked about not anything else.

so show us how you do it, the world will be forever grateful,,,

You are right Tom, we dont agree on many things, and this is alright.

Tom C

Is that why you post Tom? So your peers can judge you? I post because I feel "I" have something to say that they may find interesting, something they may find useful. Before you demand anything of me, demand these things of the individuals who inspired my seeking for answers. I seek because they aren't disclosing. You aren't seeking, you are parroting, beating the dead horse. My discovery is their discovery and you wonder why we aren't on the same page......

Regarding your out of context quote, there are exceptions. You must keep in mind Tom that you were never told what this whole thing is about, no one was! But the writing is on the walls, and in the absence of dictates from the source, speculation rules. If the internet kill switch was activated tomorrow there would be some really sad faces come the day after tomorrow when one is hit with the reality of the utter uselessness of that which is now being considered. Yes, there is magic in batteries, but that magic is extended to it from the system which supplies it with the impulses, that impulse system facilities the magic.....right?


Regards

[erfinder]

Erfinder,

please start a new thread, and then go thru your last post and show step by step how you have modified the circuit and changed things to produce each effect you have stated and gotten to where you are at....

Tom C

Nah........

[BobZilla]

erfinder & Tom I respect both of you but I think it should really be noted that Tom is talking about the monopole energizer in it's plain form as prescribed by Mr. Bedini and the topic was about the magnets. Thh audience that this is intended for is beginners who barley understand the circuit at all. Tom is providing the information as laid out by Mr. Bedini which is absolutely not to use Neo's. What I am trying to get across is the context in which this information is given. Sure we can modify it, build other iterations of it and create things that are completely different but to be faithful to the machine as described by the designer Tom is giving the proper guidance to beginners who want to start learning.

erfinder you have gone way beyond what the plain machine can teach but even you have said yourself that you built it, you learned from it so why not accept that others will have to start as you did and build it as described. I have never thought the machine was the end of the line, I think it was ALWAYS intended as a launching point for the builder to discover certain things and then move on as you have done.

erfinder I recently built a SS device that focuses purely on the collapsing field with no induction. I now have two models of it and I am working on a modification that could change the results quite a bit but I have not posted that yet. It is interesting because it shows ONE of the aspects we find in the monopole but without the other interactions from magnet induction or cross induction from trigger to power windings. I don't think this device could be called a generator, perhaps I'm wrong but I would love to have you look at my video's and comment if you were willing.

Here is the thread:
http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=1860

[Kiril_Kirilov]

erfinder & Tom I respect both of you but I think it should really be noted that Tom is talking about the monopole energizer in it's plain form as prescribed by Mr. Bedini and the topic was about the magnets. Thh audience that this is intended for is beginners who barley understand the circuit at all. Tom is providing the information as laid out by Mr. Bedini which is absolutely not to use Neo's. What I am trying to get across is the context in which this information is given. Sure we can modify it, build other iterations of it and create things that are completely different but to be faithful to the machine as described by the designer Tom is giving the proper guidance to beginners who want to start learning.

erfinder you have gone way beyond what the plain machine can teach but even you have said yourself that you built it, you learned from it so why not accept that others will have to start as you did and build it as described. I have never thought the machine was the end of the line, I think it was ALWAYS intended as a launching point for the builder to discover certain things and then move on as you have done.

erfinder I recently built a SS device that focuses purely on the collapsing field with no induction. I now have two models of it and I am working on a modification that could change the results quite a bit but I have not posted that yet. It is interesting because it shows ONE of the aspects we find in the monopole but without the other interactions from magnet induction or cross induction from trigger to power windings. I don't think this device could be called a generator, perhaps I'm wrong but I would love to have you look at my video's and comment if you were willing.

Here is the thread:
http://www.energyscienceforum.com/showthread.php?t=1860

Absolutely not to use Neo's ?!?!
This one i bought in 2011 from Rick Friedrich's r-charge.com (150 USD), and it is certified by Bedini, and IT IS WITH NEO's:

Search for "3 pole monopole" all over the net and you'll find a lot of these Beginner's KITs wich are Official Bedini KITs and are with Neodimium Magnets

One of the results:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfetvkGVvsI

[BobZilla]

You laughing at me,, ;-) ,,, ok pal your entitled to your own opinions. You obviously don't know the history around those machines. Your happy with yours are you? Works properly does it,,, be happy then and keep drinking Ricks koolaid.

Here is what I did with MINE
https://files.secureserver.net/0sU5YPmb8nK0ma

[D Rhodes]

Sounds like a Church split.. I am following JB...I am following Tom...I am following Erfinder...I am following Rick. Didnt Tesla and Edison split as well? In Church splits there is always a separation after different doctrines or teachers. Us humans are so black n white in our thinking...when ALL sides have truth, and none have it all. I guess, if JB says no Neos at all...one should use Neos to find out why we should not use them. But being lazy or not being able to afford them, we stick with our ceramics. Be wary of impatience brethren....feed babies milk...not meat.

[Allen R.]

erfinder- This thread is about proper magnets for the ssg. It is not a debate. It is standard build ssg as put forth by the designer/patent holder. Non standard configurations and non ssg devices from others are irrelevant to this discussion and will only hurt new builders.

Those kits from that person were built non standard and will not fuction in the way intended without modification. I know, I have one. JB does not use or reccomend neo magnets. He does not use them in the ssg.

The ssg does not need to be re-thought. It needs to be built exactly as the designer has said. Non standard builds will yield bad results. Sure they will spin and run but forget getting the stated results. Save your time and money by doing it right.

Only get information about the proper construction and use of the ssg from the designer/patent holder.

al

[erfinder]

You laughing at me,, ;-) ,,, ok pal your entitled to your own opinions. You obviously don't know the history around those machines. Your happy with yours are you? Works properly does it,,, be happy then and keep drinking Ricks koolaid.

Here is what I did with MINE
https://files.secureserver.net/0sU5YPmb8nK0ma

Really nice and clean "mod" Bob.

No one here is in the position to judge the work of another. All are entitled to their opinion, and those opinions should be respected...in most cases they aren't but that's primary because we all have our own dogma. The history of these machines is moot. We have no real background information. As an example, the majority didn't find out about the attraction mode till the SG Handbooks were distributed 2012-2013, this is kinda upsetting because the really old vets weren't privileged to this mode of operation, unless they were renegades and did their own thing, they never made it past repulsion mode. The few who did stumble onto the attraction mode noted how the machine functioned better, but blew it off and returned to doing things like they were instructed to??? The air is clear....who runs in attraction mode? What's with the three coil SG that was the center piece of the 2010 conference? You were shown right there, I was there and didn't get it till I completed a year of experiments, attraction and repulsion simultaneously. That single demonstration makes the handbooks useless, because it succeeds the principles they outline. We are shown many things but are not given any guidance regarding these things. The majority see these things and instead of questioning and exploring, they sink back into their comfort zone were you find yourselves right now......I have come to the realization that its far more productive to do what is suggested, rather than doing what we are told.

In the end, in the absence of real guidance we have really awesome stories which go over really well at gatherings, but no real substance, only clues, breadcrumbs..... If real details were available you all would have awesome machines right now, would be doing some incredible stuff. The inventor has made many spectacular "suggestions" some of which were embodied in actual apparatus. Instead of following those leads, the creativity has stagnated and folks are only interested in that which the inventor himself has moved away from, but is forced to return to time and time again because you all demand it!

What as a qualifies a "properly functioning machine"? What does the inventor have to say about this? What has the inventor demonstrated in this regard? Ultimately there must be a point, what is the point? If its just tuning the circuit for the best possible output to the secondary battery then my god man, move on. Didn't the inventor move on? Has anyone here applied any of the mods that he has been sharing since 2010? The mods that matter, there are a few curve balls which don't. Many of you guys are what I consider vets, you have been working on this stuff for at least 3 years. That's more than enough time to see that the inventor is the man, and has left a trail, one which could be followed, but isn't. The machines that matter aren't being built! Why? Recovery guys is something that you will integrate into all future designs. I know because I do it. This movement isn't the SG movement! This forum and its sister is the tip of the spear for "THESE" technologies, buy you guys, the men and women in the trenches give one the impression that you are only interested in lessons in recovery? My opinion my not matter but here it is anyway. The lesson isn't in recovery, its in reactive power, among other things, you are being shown:

• the nature of the energy movement inside the tank
• the fact that the reactive power can be routed out of the tank

The problem is you don't know you're dealing with a tank. Another opinion of mine.....the term "Radiant" only applies when we are discharging the tank, as it stands the term is only related to the inductive discharge, big difference.

@ Allen R,

Non standard builds are non standard builds. This isn't a debate, nor is it a comparison between apples and oranges. I desire practical application, battery charging has its limits. I am grateful to the inventor because he inspired me to think for myself, the impetus for this was his lack of presence. I am so thankful that through my own efforts I have been able to identify the source of the magic. It's in the reactor, the reactor extends this magic to the battery, there are better loads than batteries?

No one is suggesting a reinvention of the SG....it is what it is, and no one has shown that they know exactly what it is! Understanding how to manipulate the circuit doesn't mean that you know what the circuit is doing or why. And even when you are in the position to state what its doing and why, it isn't until you comprehend the the inner aspects, the ones that really matter, the ones that reach across disciplines and dogmas to unite thinkers who would appear to be at odds, then you got it.

This thread is about proper magnets for the SG.....I have said what I want to say, and leave you guys to your research, please forgive my intrusion.


Regards

[Tom C]

This thread is about proper magnets for the ssg. It is not a debate. It is standard build ssg as put forth by the designer/patent holder. Non standard configurations and non ssg devices from others are irrelevant to this discussion and will only hurt new builders.

Those kits from that person were built non standard and will not fuction in the way intended without modification. I know, I have one. JB does not use or reccomend neo magnets. He does not use them in the ssg.

The ssg does not need to be re-thought. It needs to be built exactly as the designer has said. Non standard builds will yield bad results. Sure they will spin and run but forget getting the stated results. Save your time and money by doing it right.

Only get information about the proper construction and use of the ssg from the designer/patent holder.

al

Trying to respond on a kindle here. Theories and variations abound. I don't care who follows who. I was asked by JB to make sure the monopole gets built correctly, according to his design...... this is HIS forum. I AM parroting what the inventor said. Cause he invented it. The rest is up to you.

Do whatever you want change it however you want that is the idea. But first build it like it is designed. Then go nuts.

I hesitate to respond ..... it's really simple. Just build his way first. Then hang stuff on it. I personally have over 100 modifications you can make to the vanilla SG including coil shorting and inductance modifications and hall switching and reed switching and making it a true generator. Telsa nodes genny coils.

We have things we are working on with JB that are amazing.

Tom C

[erfinder]

Trying to respond on a kindle here. Theories and variations abound. I don't care who follows who. I was asked by JB to make sure the monopole gets built correctly, according to his design...... this is HIS forum. I AM parroting what the inventor said. Cause he invented it. The rest is up to you.

Do whatever you want change it however you want that is the idea. But first build it like it is designed. Then go nuts.

I hesitate to respond ..... it's really simple. Just build his way first. Then hang stuff on it. I personally have over 100 modifications you can make to the vanilla SG including coil shorting and inductance modifications and hall switching and reed switching and making it a true generator. Telsa nodes genny coils.

We have things we are working on with JB that are amazing.

Erfinder....... you have your opinion of me and it is wrong. Nuff Said.

Tom C

I'm not your judge Tom. I have no opinion of you.

[Lman]

Kiril_Kirilov,

That "3 pole monopole" you bought is a result of what Rick has been doing behind the back of John Bedini. It has been certified by John and than Rick changed whatever he finds for convenient. He changed the magnets in the Window Motor and the coils arrangement, he changed the magnets in the 10 coiler. Look on internet and you will see the presentation of the 10 coiler - it is with black ceramic magnets. But than the people who bought the kit ask why it is with neodimium.
He has not been following John's specifications and changing the products, and this is why they do not work together anymore. John has talked about that already.
If you are not satisfied with the purchase of that 3 pole monopole kit ... call r-charge and Mr. Friedrich for explanation about the magnets.

There is not one of John's monopole energisers that uses neodimium magnets. Except the big ferris wheel where they are on the back of the ceramic and have different purpouse as Tom C pointed out already.
But the starters and intermediates would not jump to build ferris wheels so ... ceramic magnets !!!!
Otherwise it would not be a Bedini.


Lman

[Kiril_Kirilov]

You laughing at me,, ;-) ,,, ok pal your entitled to your own opinions. You obviously don't know the history around those machines. Your happy with yours are you? Works properly does it,,, be happy then and keep drinking Ricks koolaid.

Here is what I did with MINE
https://files.secureserver.net/0sU5YPmb8nK0ma

Not laughing at you, Bob. laughing at the "history" ... How these kits were sold, even promised and probably bused used as awards, and sold to some of the free energy conferences (2011?), where JB participated for sure....then I don'n know what happened, but more important is that if it seems wrong now, it was considered as true and certificated or approved for years! For sure the could be different magnets. I believe it is much easier to instruct beginner to follow verbally instructions, as otherwise there's need to explain in details what this machine supposed to do, and how to achieve it...not just replicating without awareness...

P.s. Tried few things with it, it worked not so satisfactory, but considered the problems as quality of manufacturing. Even tried alu-rotor with 6 poles plus 6 coils, cap dumps... Etc...
Probably will show you new incarnation of the kit, ... Need time though
Kindest regards,
Kiril