Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)

[Cap-Z-ro]

OK Bill...put the bottle down and call it an evening.

*tucks Bill in*

[Pirate88179]

OK Bill...put the bottle down and call it an evening.

*tucks Bill in*

Hell Cap, I just got home from work.  Of course, I may not have really posted this.

Bill

[Cap-Z-ro]

* applies cold compress to suppress Bill's bad dream*

[Farmhand]

Well if that's your position then the answer is simple. No the QEG does not work as claimed. Neither has any deadline ever been met. And yes fraud is a valid way to describe what is transpiring with the solicitations for six figures of mula. What measurements that have been taken demonstrate that in the efficiency numbers, sub 30%.  This circuit simulation was able to match also identically the waveforms displayed by Jamie etal.

www.energiederzukunft.org/forum/5-allgem...-generator?start=198[/font][/size]

You have joined us at a time when we are really just treading water. TK, being so bored with the level of activity, took matters into is own hands and created the miraculous solid state miniQEG, which is the only device with the name QEG attached that has been shown through very detailed measurement to be OU. We know in our hearts that is is'nt but TK and the rest of us do not know why.  Farmhand, being similarly inspired has done his own exploration, but requires much propping up as he has difficulty with vector math. These are all facts which can be explored in the varied and sometimes detailed pages of this thread. Happy reading.!

PS. Jamie may have been mistaken at the beginning when he first measured the power levels of his device as he undoubtedly used peak-to-peak values (8 time more power than was really present), but he has long since crossed over to the darkside to maintain funding for this charade.

I didn't see anyone post any proof of any OU. The reality of the situation is that no matter how much Volts and Amps we see
in a tank and regardless of the indicated phase and the input power the actual output is not possible to be OU. It's just stored
"activity" in the tank and the output can only be a portion of that and that is all "from the supply".

I thought TK showed that the phase in his primary tank was at 90 degrees and so that would mean no real power or energy
could leave the tank or enter it. Truth is that the phase must be not quite 90 degrees in order for the tank to accept input.
The phase can never in practice stay at 90 degree exactly.

What I think should be shown is the phase variations when a tiny load is on the tank as well as when a larger load is on it.
Now if the V and A in the tank was to remain at 90 degrees no output could be got from it.

TK showed measurements on a "primary tank", whereas I am more or less ignoring the primary and measuring the induced
V and A in a secondary tank as well as the output tank which is induced by the main tank. And load powers.

Without measuring the output how can we know what it is ?

Without measuring the output we have no way of knowing any efficiency ratings.

I seen no in-out measurements indicating OU on this thread. Or any other for that matter.

I don't just have difficulty with vector maths I have never learned it never been taught it and only pick up what I can
which is difficult without any background in advanced maths.

The reality is that I don't need to know it to be able to produce the effects, I would only need the maths to try to make sense of
the measurements, the circuit continues to do what it does regardless of measurements.

Knowing how much energy it should take to get a light to a certain brightness allows us to know by just looking if something is
very efficient or very inefficient, it's the values close to 100 % that require close and careful measurement and only then if we
want to know exactly the efficiency.

So we have not seen any input to output measurements before during and after a load is taken from a resonant tank type
arrangement. That would show exactly how the phase and tank activity changes with the loads.

And as I've noticed if a low enough resistive load is placed on a resonating tank then the low resistance loading will destroy the
"Quality" factor of the tank and also destroy the resonant rise on the tank. In other words not enough energy can be input to
overcome the load and pump up the tank. Don't need vector maths to see that happen.

My main point has been that the resonant tank activity is a considerable load in itself, and that to produce and maintain that activity is a constant "cost" which most experimenters ignore. Also that just measuring the input and output to a device is
not a true indication of what it costs to be able to run it if it is connected to the paid for grid.

If one has a solar array feeding the grid and net energy exported is more than energy consumed then the grid input to a small
DC supply can be ignored and considered as a battery with a blocking diode. Same thing if we have a battery charged by the
sun, the input is already free and so measuring the efficiency of the device alone is a valid indicator of the true cost.

If there is input to output measurements I missed them.  I'm not slacking off by the way, I've just been quite ill again.
Almost in recovery and hope to be able to show soon the tank measurements using non inductive CSR's while under no
output loading and while under light and heavy output loading.

Fact is "right or wrong" that many readers don't believe what the educated guys say and not many educated folks show
experiments. TK being one obvious exception to that of course. What TK wants to show and what others want to see
to convince them of no OU from a resonant tank or reactive "power" might be different, maybe people want to see how
the tank activity and phase relationship between voltage and current changes with different loads and see it happen in
real time with real loads.

I've managed to increase the input to about 6 Watts while powering a fluro and increase it brightness as well, more input
means more accurate measurements. As well as that I can now show a "tank" with an extra coil in series with the tank
and the load so that coil is not "tanked" or part of the tank, I can show the voltage distribution on that coil and the tank
coil with a neon. The extra coil has a lot more inductance and resistance but not more self capacitance.

Fact is that people trained in electrical engineering and such have no more authority over the experimenters here, than a
tradesman boilermaker has over people building a steel framed go-cart in their back yard. I don't get the god given right to
make fun of people or belittle people trying to do metal fabricating in their backyard, if they were making dangerous repairs
to a vehicle that travels on public roads then that is different. With electronics the grid is that line not to cross, if we mess
with it we should do things properly and listen to advice from people educated in that discipline.

Most experimenters are only manipulating power to get odd measurements from conventional measuring equipment. Not many
are actively looking to harness energy from the environment for cheap of free.

The numbers next to the posts make no difference to me, they only indicate how often a person posts based on when the registered, and only for that account anyway, I'm sure many of the "cheer leading gate keepers" have multiple accounts.

A misconception that manipulating power will show OU has been introduced by the reactive power OU claimants and the people
claiming Tesla's power magnification methods are OU for him don't help either.

..

[MileHigh]

The tank holds two forms of energy that slosh back and forth.  You can imagine that as a rotating phasor with voltage on one axis and current on the other axis.  The tip of the phasor, the rotating arrow, shows you the instantaneous voltage and current, like you see with a Lissajous figure on your scope.

There are two ways to extract energy from the tank.  When the capacitor is at the peak voltage, a load resistor across the capacitor will extract energy.  When the coil is at maximum current, a load resistor in series with the coil will extract energy.  It's just like the child on the spring-horse in a playground.  When the child is vertical, he or she is at maximum velocity, maximum kinetic energy.  So if the child is stopped quickly by a parent's hands, that's the energy discharge.  Likewise, when the child is at the bottom of the swing, all of the energy is stored in the bent spring as potential energy.  That bent spring could also be discharged by having it do some form of mechanical work.

So the QEG tank circuit is like a chlld swinging on a spring-horse in a playground.  Like Farmhand said, the energy is always seeping out of the system, and therefore to keep the same amplitude, power has to be supplied and it seeps into the tank circuit.

The QEG tank circuit is like any other LC tank circuit.  For example, tank circuits have been used in tube radios since the 1920s.  Nothing special is going on, may as well move along.

One would hope that more and more Qweegeeers that are doing the builds and working on the technical side of things would do their own research about this and figure it out for themselves.  It's really not rocket science.

The heart-breaker for the enthusiasts is that there is just no magic here.  It's all just a wild goose chase.  You are networked together and some of you might be disheartened and also feel used.  You never know what a small critical group of people that think alike can do under these circumstances.  Like, go see a lawyer.