At 08:16 PM 12/15/2009, Terry Blanton wrote:
We built a Bedini motor, specifically, the bicycle wheel type known as
the "school girl motor" and measured the efficiency with a torque
meter. We found the efficiency to be around 30%.
The truth is that pulse charging of a battery removes the sulfides
that accumulate on the plates. John knows this since he has a charger
which he says "rejuvenates" golf cart batteries.
Pulse motors fool a lot of people but not a torque meter. :-)
In other words, the pulse charging of the battery in a Bedini motor
operates the battery in a mode which extracts maximum energy from it.
So the battery lasts much longer than expected. Is that correct?
But the use of capacitors wouldn't be subject to this effect, and the
decline in energy would be obvious, as voltage would continually
decline until it was too low to operate the device. Hence such
devices don't use capacitors in place of batteries.
This is even without fraudulent intent. Add fraudulent intent, which
sometimes appears later, when the inventor exhausts his approaches to
"perfect" the device, but is under pressure to perform a
demonstration or his funding gets yanked, etc., and all bets are off.
There are countless ways to conceal an energy source. And that some
parts of the device are not clearly visible simply amplifies
suspicion that this is happening.
Consider this from the point of view of a master con game:
At this point, the obvious suspicion is that the power is being
supplied by the battery. So, after they have run this demonstration
for a while, then they start addressing the obvious objections.
1. The hours of observation. They remove the restriction. For a
modest fee, enough to pay the security guard to sit there, you can
watch as long as you want. They even make you pay the cost. Or maybe
they even cover it, and just pay the guard themselves. Whatever is
needed to overcome this obvious objection.
2. The battery. They have a capacitor battery replacement. They
charge it up to the battery voltage and replace the battery with it.
The device keeps running. They even show the capacitor voltage. Damn!
The peak is staying constant or is even increasing slowly.
3. The translucent panels are replaced with clear ones.
By this time the skeptics are flattened, all they can do is keep
repeating "Fraud!" And they might be right, but because Steorn has
addressed the obvious objections, ones which they set up in the first
place by the way they arranged the demonstration, the skeptics are
sufficiently beaten, in the eyes of possible investors, that more
investment comes in. The real goal is this, not a demonstration.
The demonstration has been arranged to set up this process. That's
why such obvious objections are not addressed ab initio. It's quite
skillful, politically. Set up your opponents to make false
objections, then expose the objections as false. This creates inertia
against your opponents, for if they made a series of false
objections, they must be biased, right?
Thus the argument that the objections have been answered gains legs.
It looks to me like this is what they are doing, but there are more
things in heaven and earth than I have dreamed of. Including
incredibly sophisticated con games.
