Posted on

## Poor Man’s Split the Positive Battery Swapper by RS Stafford

At last year’s conference, Peter Lindemann demonstrated a Bedini SSG energizer that produced a lot of mechanical work all weekend and the batteries stayed charged up!

It worked beautifully and was done with an automated circuit that rotates the batteries in a certain way but most people do not have the know-how to be able to build that circuit.

At this year’s conference, RS Stafford replicated this battery swapping method with circuit breaks and other common parts from his local hardware store. It’s inexpensive and very, very simple to build. This is the machine that ANYONE can make work if they just follow some simple wiring diagrams and RS’s instructions.

Let me explain the Split the Positive concept… lf I were to ask someone – even someone with a background in electronics or electricity if a light bulb would light up if it were placed between the positives of the batteries as shown to the left, they would say no.

Let’s say they are 1.5 volt AA batteries. The two in series makes 3 volts and the other single battery is 1.5 volts by itself. Well, 3 volts – 1.5 volts in opposition means there is still a voltage potential difference of 1.5 volts between the positives. A LED bulb for example will indeed light up because potential differences are what are important in electricity and NOT polarity.

Here’s an important thing to understand – while the bulb is lit up, the current from the two batteries in series is charging up battery #3. Therefore, if battery #3 is dead, it will charge up as the bulb is lit. When it is charged, it can move to the position of #1 or #1 batteries and one of the batteries #1 or #2 can be placed into the #3 position and it will get charged up while the bulb is lit. So you can see that by constantly rotating these batteries, you actually wind up with way more load powering capability than you would get if you just ran the bulb on a single battery until it’s dead and do that for the other two batteries.

John Bedini came up with this method years ago after studying the concepts in the famous Ed Gray motor, which had a similar process, but with much higher voltages. The above example has been known as Bedini’s 3 Battery system and very few people have ever understood the profound implications of it.

Now when you combine this concept with a highly efficient Bedini Energizer where you can recover a high percentage of what goes into the system in addition to getting some extra electricity from some generator coils that have very low drag, you have the keys to be able to produce mechanical or electrical work while making up for virtually all its own losses. That means you have a simple system that keeps itself charged up and you can create the battery swapping part of the system with parts from your local hardware store!

Our power grid is doomed to crash and you will be at a very strong advantage with what RS is teaching you here in this presentation.

Posted on

## Dollard & Lindemann on Public Access TV

Some segments of our conference presentations have made it to Seattle’s Community Access Television!

If you haven’t seen these presentations, you can check out these excerpts…

Here is a segment on one of Eric Dollard’s presentations on Extraluminal Transmission – http://seattlecommunitymedia.org/series/adventures-extraterrestrial/episode/free-energy-science-tesla

Here is a segment on the 3 Battery SG motor/generator that Peter Lindemann demonstrated at last year’s conference, which kept itself charged up: http://seattlecommunitymedia.org/series/adventures-extraterrestrial/episode/free-energy-science-bedini

There may be more of these coming! Seattle has a huge population so many people will have an opportunity to learn more about what our community has been up to. If you know anyone in the Seattle area, send them these links. Of course, you can watch these online from anywhere.

Posted on

## Open System Thermodynamics by Peter Lindemann

Get the whole presentation here: https://emediapress.com/shop/open-system-thermodynamics/

Since 1977, the entire field of thermodynamics was upgraded with Ilya Prigogine’s Nobel Prize winning work to include Open System Thermodynamics. In a nutshell, it means that any system that is open with the environment can output more work than the operator has to supply.

Take note that contrary to the conventionally trained academic who is always quick to point out that there can’t be more output than input is making a false argument because that is not what is actually claimed by the inventors of legitimate free energy technologies.

More output than what the operator has to supply is not the same thing as claiming more output than was is going into the system. Obviously, this means there is other input from elsewhere that is not provided by the operator of the system.

It is often said that Prigogine’s work extended thermodynamics to include open systems, but the reality is that it did not extend thermodynamics, it corrected it. The reason for this is very simple – there is no such thing as a closed system and every single system is open.

The deeper reality is that every system is open – some are designed to make use of external input that is separate from the operator’s input and some are designed to only use the operator’s input.

If you have a flashlight and the battery has 10 units of potential energy to light the bulb, when the flashlight is on, minus losses, there will only be 10 units of light or less depending on efficiency. Efficiency is the ratio if TOTAL input vs INTENDED output. This is what is meant by a closed system because it does not utilize free environmental input such as gravity, heat, light, wind, water, etc…

If you take this flashlight and stick it deep into a snow bank that is freezing, the battery will interact with this cold environmental temperature and it will not power the light as long. That is because it is not a closed system after all and easily interacts with the environment outside of itself. If it was a closed system, the battery would continue to power the light irrespective of the environmental temperature that the flashlight is operating in.

Let’s look at an example of a child flying a kite. If the child inputs 10 units of energy and the wind inputs 90 parts energy for a certain period of time, that is 100 parts of energy total input. If 70% of all that input is lost in bad kite design, wind friction on the kite, etc… that means that only 30 units of energy were actual kite flying work accomplished. 100 parts of energy were input and 30 units of INTENDED work were done – that equals 30% efficiency.

That means 30 units of intended work were accomplished but the child only had to input 10 units of work. That is a 300% net GAIN in energy compared to what the operator had to pay for. The ratio of OPERATOR input compared to INTENDED work done is COP or Coefficient of Performance. In this case, the COP is 3.0. COP does not include free environmental input and this is how every heat pump is rated for example.

The kite flying example is a perfectly legitimate free energy system where the operator of the system got way more out of the system than what he had to put in. Again, notice that this is NOT more output than input, but more output than the operator had to contribute – meaning there is indeed extra free environmental input from somewhere.

Watch this excerpt from Peter Lindemann’s Open System Thermodynamics presentation for deeper elaboration on this concept. The next time a skeptic tells you that there can’t be more output than input and that anything like that would violate the laws of thermodynamics, please point them to this post and video because the fact is that they are making an illegitimate argument about something that was never claimed by those who have real free energy technologies.

Aaron

Posted on

## Peter Lindemann Announces Retirement

Peter Lindemann has announced his retirement from the field of Free Energy. He was a board member of the legendary Borderland Sciences Research Foundation, has authored and produced many books and presentation on a wide range of alternative energy and science topics, and was co-founder of both A & P Electronic Media and the Energy Science and Technology Conference originally called the Bedini-Lindemann Science & Technology Conference.

Peter is one of a handful of friends and mentors that have been very instrumental in my own knowledge and understanding of this field and for about 7 years, we build A & P Electronic Media together, which many consider to be the most important and definitive library of material on free energy, which is explained by open system thermodynamics.
Please read Peter’s retirement announcement as this marks a turning point for all of us who have been following this field for years. Peter Lindemann is truly one of the last pioneers of the modern-day Tesla Science & Free Energy movement and we wish him well on his new path!
This is reposted from this link: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20673-thank-you-farewell.html If you would like to post a response, you can do that at  Energeic Forum or you can leave a comment at the bottom.
Thank You, and Farewell

Dear Forum Participants,

This will be my last, planned post to this forum, or any other public forum. As of December 31, 2016, I am announcing my formal retirement from the field of “advanced alternative energy” research and any public role that I may have played over the last 20 years. After this date, I have no more plans to speak at any future conferences or publish any other books or lectures concerning this subject matter. My website at Free Energy will remain available as a teaching tool for the foreseeable future, but may not be up-dated very much from this point on.

In a few months, I’ll be 66 years old. I have been involved in this field for 43 years, ever since 1973, when I first learned of Ed Gray’s remarkable electric engine that kept its own batteries charged. In that time, I have had the astonishing privilege of studying under, becoming friends with, and making significant contributions to the work of five extraordinary gentlemen: Bruce E. DePalma, Robert G. Adams, Trevor James Constable, David R. Squires, and John C. Bedini.

Each of these men had a towering intellect and an insatiable drive to gift humanity with the fruit of their creative genius. Each of them succeeded because they were skilled experimentalists, honest critics of their own work, and because they were willing to publish significant portions of their scientific discoveries.

And now, each of them has departed this world. Their work here is over. Three of them died just this year. Starting in the 1980s, as a group, we set out to publish enough information about the “free energy” technologies to make sure they could never be suppressed again. At this point, I believe that goal has been accomplished, and therefore my public work in this field is done, as well. This process will continue in the able hands of the younger generation, and so I can bow out now without disturbing that progress.

People close to me know that I have been slowly moving in this direction for a number of years. John’s unexpected death last month gave me an opportunity to reassess my priorities and refocus my attention on other activities that are also very meaningful to me. So, starting in 2017, I plan to give my full attention to these other pursuits.

If you are reading this, Thank You for contributing to my life. If you were a Supporter, thank you for your support. I hope my work has encouraged your own efforts. If you were a Skeptic, thank you for your skepticism. I hope my efforts gave you fresh reasons to question your knowledge base, even as your skepticism gave me fresh reasons to re-examine mine. If you were a Naysayer, thank you for trying to “save me” from a fantasy you were sure I was trapped in. I appreciate your good will and noble intentions, even if I was not always polite about it!

Everyone of you has enriched my experience of being involved in this field in some way. But over the years, my motivations for staying involved have changed tremendously. In the last 43 years, I have experienced being the Novice, the Naysayer, the Skeptic, the Experimenter, the Student, the Discoverer, the Historian, the Author, the Educator, and the Expert! I actually didn’t try to BE any of these things. I just wanted to know the Truth about certain anomalous inventions, and in general, about all the different ways Nature is willing to provide useful energy. So, no matter where you are on this path, I was right where you are now at some point in my evolution.

What I discovered is that Truth is only found in Philosophy and Religion, but NOT in Science. In Science, all we can find are the FACTS, and how those facts have been INTERPRETED and REPORTED throughout history!

Correctly used, Science is a “formal method on inquiry.” Science is not an “intellectual model of reality” or even a “world view.” Attempting to make it function that way is like using “science” as a pair of sunglasses, which can only limit the number of frequencies of reality presented for you to see. Never get trapped in that imaginary place where you believe that “science” can describe all valuable experiences. It cannot weigh or measure by any known metric the importance of your Mother’s Love or the power that can be unleashed by generosity or kindness. Science has a proper place in society, but its role for the real benefit of the Scientist is quite limited. Here, Philosophy is more important.

This is why, up until about 125 years ago, becoming a Natural Philosopher was the highest possible attainment in the field of science. “Physics” started as the study of the physical world, and that was the study of the behavior of Nature. Imitating Nature allowed technology to develop. Understanding WHAT nature was doing, and HOW to mimic that action with “man-made” means, was the beginning of Invention. Ultimately, this lead to a deeper study of WHY Nature did what it did, and this inquiry developed into a Philosophical observation and contemplation of the behavior of the Natural World.

To be a Natural Philosopher was to recognize one’s own embeddedness in the Natural World one was studying, and to participate with the higher Philosophy of Nature as a guide to one’s own behavior and discovery process. This understanding of the origin of discovery is why John and I would always say “the machine is the teacher.” This whole “natural educational process” has been replaced with University Degrees and a “Theoretical Physics” that has become divorced from the need to run a “reality check” on itself. This has left today’s science as an empty shell of what it used to be and what it must once again become in a more enlightened future. Today’s society uses science to serve people up as a commodity in the economy to be exploited, whereas some future society will use science to serve human need and free people’s time for more creative pursuits.

Philosophically, this is what I found. The facts of science are on your WORK BENCH. Your interpretations of these facts are in your MIND, characterized by the accuracy of your observations and by the imperfections in your mental model of reality. The reports of your interpretations are in these FORUMS and other records, a full two steps removed from the facts. This is why if you don’t build and run the experiment yourself, you are left with believing someone else’s interpretations and you cut yourself off from the opportunity to pick up on the trail of discovery left by earlier experimenters. As long as you discipline yourself to never confuse these things, the one from the other, you have begun your own genuine discovery process.

In the end, you must believe in yourself and you must earn your own deepest self-respect through honesty, integrity, and clarity. These aspects are not a part of Science, but they must become a part of each Scientist who aspires to do Science well. If you do this, if you let life integrate you at the core of your being, you will discover your way of finding everything you will ever look for.

I believe in you. Thank you for carrying on where I now leave off.

Farewell,
Peter

PETER’S WEBSITE: http://free-energy.ws
Posted on

## NEW RELEASE – Bedini SG – Beyond the Advanced Handbook by Peter Lindemann

Bedini SG – Beyond the Advanced Handbook by Peter Lindemann – This is the first time John Bedini’s 1984 Kromrey Generator has been publicly demonstrated ever and the meters showed that the output was 200% compared to the input. And, the primary KEY piece of information to make it was has been fully disclosed! The Bedini SG that was demonstrated had a self-rotating battery system based on Bedini’s Splitting the Positive diagram and it recycled virtually all of the energy is used to run the energizer back through batteries to charge them up. The amp hours of running time that this energizer demonstrated was way more than the battery capacity can account for. A diode method was also shown that elicited way more radiant energy than the circuit and batteries could even handle, which teaches you that generating the radiant is not the issue because it has always been in the machine from the beginning – the real issue is how to safely capture it! The bottom line is that this presentation demonstrates that what was taught in the Advanced Bedini SG Handbook book is true.  Release date – August 9, 2016. Learn more: Bedini SG – Beyond the Advanced Handbook