1:  There is no free energy. 

Too many independent observations over the years confirm this basic rule of nature.     On the other hand,  it may be possible to direct a source of energy, which is somehow a part of the fabric of the universe normally unnoticed by us, in such a way that useful work is done with no apparent cost in terms of fuel or labor.  Since most of the devices which have seemed to exhibit some success involve running on one battery while charging another, some experimenters would be quite happy to see verifiable and repeatable ‘overunity’ operation, that is, more energy comes out than you put in.  Even in this seemingly simple measure of success there lurks much opportunity for monkey business or questionable interpretation of the instrument readings. 


2:  What is your definition of ‘free’ ?

If you want dependable, easily harnessed energy on tap with the least trouble, get real estate that comes with free natural gas.  Or make a device to run your electric meter backwards.  Even if you succeed and tap the mystical power of the universe with coils and motors, history has proven that no one who seems to succeed in this free energy business gets rich, famous, or even to live very long or be happy.  Surely you will spend hours, days, weeks, years of experimentation before achieving success.  So only if the idea of tinkering around with gadgets or circuits appeals to you in it’s own right regardless of immediate reductions in your utility bills should you take up energy experimentation.


In my case I am interested in disconnecting from dependence on the power grid.  I don’t mind feeding in some ‘energy pay’ from solar cells, but my energy hungry life style requires more than a modest array of solar cells can provide (water pumping and refrigeration really suck up the juice).  So any scheme that promises an energy gain is appealing to me.  But my main interest is more one of intellectual curiosity than hope of major gains.  I’d like to understand how it seems to work sometimes for various different people.  Which brings us to …


3:  This stuff is hard  to understand.    If it was easy everybody and her uncle would be cruising around in free energy aircars.  Even the people who make working devices are ineffective in explaining to mainstream scientists how they work in a way that the initial success is easily repeated elsewhere.  Yet some people have good success in repeatably being able to make verifiable working devices.  Bedini especially has been very successful of late in imparting clear instructions for others to follow.  Here is a link to a motor of his design built by a 12 year old girl for a science fair project:


4:  I have to acknowledge that there is something there that I don’t understand well enough to write off or ignore.  I have personally seen an example of an early Bedini design that to my satisfaction generated more power than it consumed.  In a period of just under two hours it recharged one car battery enough to light a headlight brightly instead of very dimly at the beginning.  The specific gravity of this battery increased from a low density  discharged condition to a higher density at the top of the charged range on the hydrometer.  Meanwhile the ‘source’ battery did not seem to discharge at all, measured by specific gravity or headlight brightness.  For most of the two hours 4 sealed beam headlights were also operated at apparently full brightness.  I examined the apparatus and would testify that there were no hidden wires or air pipes or such.  Numerous people witnessed this at the Tesla symposium in Colorado Springs in 72-74 or thereabouts.   Since then I have studied whatever materials I could find, conducted a few actual experiments (with no discernable success or increased knowledge).


5:  Tom Bearden has come the closest to being able to explain these phenomena to mainstream scientists.  He even has the US government and many conspiracy theorists convinced.  His explanations are loaded with math which, to me is not understandable.  I can’t find any particular error that I can point to but on the other hand I am also unable to make the math tell me how to cut parts and make a real world device.  I’m sure the failings are mine and not Tom’s, but I am always suspicious of math laden explanations that don’t tell me how to cut parts that work.

Here’s Tom’s website where you can delve into his scalar energy warfare ideas, download pretty complete and up to date copies of his scientific texts, and read about his latest project, the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator:



6:  Free Energy experimenters everywhere owe these two guys  Bedini and  Bearden  a great debt for maintaining interest and supporting the free flow of information for at least 30 years or so.  They both have patiently tried for years to repeat and rearrange their explanations of what they so easily seem to comprehend in an effort to make it understandable to the rest of us.    Another force for good in this direction has been the KeelyNet organization.  These folks started back in the pre internet days independent computer bulletin boards and have been collecting and filing free energy and other weird phenomena stuff for around three decades.



7:  Here’s another site with links to all sorts of weird phenomena


8:  Antigravity, time reversal, invisibility, and all sorts of phenomena have been claimed and have been figured into somebody’s explanation of free energy at one time or another.  And besides, claims of that sort make interesting reading.  If the last two sites don’t provide enough links, let your search engine do the walking.  You can spend hours of research on these topics. 


9:  My own personal theory is that there is probably something here, but we do not understand what is going on well enough to explain what we see or to create reproducible results.  Some writers postulate some sort of psychic involvement with the investigator, of that  some of the parts or even the local area has to be ‘conditioned’ properly before the equipment will work.  AS I say, I have studied this stuff for 20+ years, and my background in mainstream science only serves to add to the confusion.  Many times I have felt close to a breakthrough in understanding only to find it just out of my reach.  This usually happens after several rereadings of some experimenter’s explanation of how his equipment works.  Many of these explanations are very plausible sounding and full of scientific terms, but on continued study they only become more obscure or confusing (at least to me).  If there is anything useful here I feel it will be found in one of the following areas: 

            A)  ‘Ringing’ the ether:  Exploiting some resonance effect in the fabric of space itself whereby a coil or mechanical system is caused to oscillate at the correct frequency by means of a small input of energy.  At the resonant frequency, energy is tapped out of the resonating system.  This seems to be the basis of devices by Moray, some of Tesla’s experiments, and many others who use coils or antennas.

            B)  Unusual characteristics of magnets and coils:  There are many unusual or unexpected effects associated with permanent magnets or electromagnets.  A few examples:  When the DC circuit energizing an electromagnet is broken, a voltage pulse is produced that greatly exceeds the original energizing voltage.  A permanent magnet does not know or care if a coil is moving near it (thus generating electricity), or how much electricity is generated in that way.  Most magnetizable materials exhibit  hysteresis and saturation effects in their B-H curve (graph of applied field vs magnetization), it may be possible to exploit these non linear effects to advantage.  The Bearden et. al. MEG seems to work by having small control coils direct the magnetic flux from a permanent magnet through two alternate magnetic flux circuits which contain larger generator coils.  A small steering current presumably is able to cause a larger output from the generator coils.  The experimenters may be exploiting hysteresis in the core material if it is the case that the steering coils change the flux level enough to take the core material into and out of saturation.  Bedini has described the operation of the early motor I witnessed in a way that seems to be compatible with this sort of explanation.  Bedini acknowledges that in many of his ‘motors’, the rotating elements are really only there to operate a switch at the correct timing to exploit some special characteristics of the coils – the rotation is secondary and not actually contributing to energy production at all.

            C)  ‘Relaxation time’:  when an electrical circuit is closed, the effect is propagated to all parts of the circuit at the speed of light.  But the electrons which actually move current in the circuit, being physical entities with mass,  are clearly not moving at the speed of light (for one thing, general relativity prohibits it).  Some experimenters seek to exploit this effect by switching the power in part of the circuit on long enough to charge a capacitor or other charge holding device, but then it is switched off before the electrons actually have a chance to start moving.  The theory is that you an utilize the battery as a potential source without draining it’s charge by permitting a flow of current carrying electrons.  The relaxation time concept is recognized and measured by mainstream science.  Bedini and others have described devices which swap charge back and forth between capacitors which seem to utilize this phenomenon. 




            D) Vacuum Zero Point Energy:  Mainstream science is beginning to recognize this concept , which argues that even at absolute zero there is still a minimum level of energy present throughout the universe.  This is said to arise out of the nature of space itself which the proponents of these theories believe is full of pairs of entities (electrons and holes in some explanations) which are constantly being created and destroyed. (Following the original theory developed by P.A.M Dirac in the mid 1900’s.)   Influencing this process in such a way as to unbalance the process of creation and destruction of charge carriers could create an excess of electrons or holes which might be exploited as electric current.   Search for information on the ‘Casimir Effect’ to find out about mainstream science discussions of the zero point energy.



            E)  Physical effects when charging batteries:  This phenomena is more accepted and at least partially explained by mainstream science.  It may not be free energy at all, maybe it is only an efficient way to charge a lead acid storage battery.  Essentially the experimenters charge the battery with pulsed DC instead of constant potential DC.  If the charging voltage pulses at an appropriate frequency (on the order of several MHz) then the sort of relaxation effect discussed above is seen and it is claimed that the battery can be brought to full charge in a short time and without draining much current form the excitiation source.  During the time the current is pulsed on the lead molecules in solution are ‘bumped’ toward the opposite plate.  The molecules continue their motion after the potential pulse is removed.  This is another one of those effects that must be properly ‘tuned’ to work properly.  The frequency, duty cycle, and current levels all must be set correctly for a particular battery  at a particular time, or there is no over unity effect.   This link is to a more conventional charger that utilizes pulse technology:    


Note that there may be some common thread of cause and effect that links many of these and other weird, seemingly unexplainable effects (we haven’t even looked at mobeius coils, torroid coil effects, or antigravity effects exhibited by some oscillating electrical circuits in this discussion …).  At this point we do not know enough to develop any unifying theory that will aid in understanding or linking these effects.  If there is any progress in understanding to be made in free energy investigation, I think it will happen through investigation and understanding of these otherwise unexplainable observations.