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

[dieter]

James said his prototype was running for 150 hours. The taiwan replication used two bulbs to indicate resonance, while the naysayers said there is Nada. How can nada power two bulbs? Suddently it is accepted to work as a generator. Then a report about COP 1.3. If so then Nobel, mh says, but tk says COP 1.3 not even worth to build. German replication 2500W out. tube. Witts vids, several.


And the Naysayers said nay from the beginning on, without to know any details... "impossible" what are you lurking around here anyway, I double: get an underunity forum and pollute it with your bad vibes. You say they did not proof anything, but in fact you did not proof any believable reason why you are here, acting as the mother of all sh!tstorms on any attempt of free energy,  especially (actually ONLY) when you're afraid it could be real.


I don't know for sure if you're pseudohumans, but they do exist and they make this world a piece of crap.


Beside all technical aspects, I feel that these 3 people, James, Hopegirl and the other woman are of high integrity and said sh!tstorms that you ate so proud of, have hurt them severly. This whole thing must be a tremendous burden. And then lots of Teenies pop up and say "scam!"... what a complex intellectial analysis.


Anyway, especially that older women appears so honest and integer... It's about people. They may fail, but they are no scammers. I really hate people who got that "scam!" quick draw attitude because it happened to me when some psychosect stalkers ruined my software programming business. That's so easy with the web...

[MarkE]

James said his prototype was running for 150 hours. The taiwan replication used two bulbs to indicate resonance, while the naysayers said there is Nada. How can nada power two bulbs? Suddently it is accepted to work as a generator. Then a report about COP 1.3. If so then Nobel, mh says, but tk says COP 1.3 not even worth to build. German replication 2500W out. tube. Witts vids, several.


And the Naysayers said nay from the beginning on, without to know any details... "impossible" what are you lurking around here anyway, I double: get an underunity forum and pollute it with your bad vibes. You say they did not proof anything, but in fact you did not proof any believable reason why you are here, acting as the mother of all sh!tstorms on any attempt of free energy,  especially (actually ONLY) when you're afraid it could be real.


I don't know for sure if you're pseudohumans, but they do exist and they make this world a piece of crap.


Beside all technical aspects, I feel that these 3 people, James, Hopegirl and the other woman are of high integrity and said sh!tstirms that you ate so proud of, have hurt them severly. This whole thing must be a tremendous burden. And then lots of Teenies pop up and say "scam!"... what a complex intellectial analysis.


Anyway, especially that older women appears so honest and integer... It's about people. They may fail, but they are no scammers. I really hate people who got that "scam!" quick draw attitude because it happened to me when some psychosect stalkers ruined my software programming business. That's so easy with the web...

Dieter if James said that it was working for almost a week straight (150 hours vs 168 hours in a week) then surely they at least have video of that.  If they had one working for so long, why is it that they were unable to reproduce?

I gauge integrity by the consistency between what people claim and what they deliver.  These guys claim to have a world changing technology.  Where is the delivery?

[F_Brown]

I get that they lack a clue as to how the machine could output more energy than it inputs, and that's OK.  Free energy is really a very simple thing.  If one puts a sail on a boat, they are capturing and utilizing free energy.  Same thing here, if the machine works as claimed, it's just using a different kind of sail to capture and utilize EM energy.  Although, in the absence of any satisfying explanation as to just how that works, some some hard statistics are going to be needed by those who lack the ability to go and see the machine working as claimed for themselves.  Thrapp seems to have also shown some lights lighting up, although he seems to have failed to provide any convincing evidence that his machine actually does what he claims it does.

I've been researching new energy science for over a decade, and there are people here on this forum that have been doing that for two or three times that long.  In that time I have reviewed more alleged over-unity devices than I care to think about.  I started my research here on this forum when it was hosted as a yahoo group by spending months reviewing over 10,000 posts to find potential devices to investigate further.  I found there is a very common progression followed by people who claim they have built a device that operate over-unity, and the strongest commonality in that progression is the failure of the claimants to provide sound and verifiable statistics that clearly show over-unity operation.

So to put an end to all the bickering, simply provide some sound and verifiable statistics.

Best regards,

FB

[TinselKoala]

And it would be nice if the actual facts that ARE known aren't continually altered and misrepresented.

1. It was the woman, not James Robitaille, that claimed 150 hours of "working".
2. Her definition of "working" clearly differs from mine -- since every one of the QEG team members will tell you, if asked, that they DO NOT have a working prototype that will run itself and power external loads.
3. Timothy Thrapp and WITTS are known to be.... unreliable. Nobody, nowhere, ever, has reproduced any of his many claimed free energy and overunity devices.
4. There is NOTHING in the present QEG design that resembles or operates like any electrostatic generators, most especially Wimshurst. Don't believe me? Then show some electrostatic work of your own that demonstrates your understanding and how the QEG relates.
5. When a 500 watt lightbulb lights up, that does NOT mean that it is dissipating 500 Watts!
6. The simulations that have been done are matching some of the actual data from the QEG team, and indicate that the measurements are measuring _circulating reactive power_ and not real usable power. If you want to get excited about circulating reactive power that is much greater than the input power..... you can do it much more cheaply and simply than with a QEG.
7. The various Tesla patents that the QEG team have been referring to have nothing to do with what they are trying to build. Tesla is ROFLing in his grave.
8. You dismiss my postings of diagrams of variable reluctance and shaded-pole motors as if you don't see the relevance... but that is exactly what is being built here. Take any motor of this type--- anyone can find them easily enough in AC fans -- and turn the shaft mechanically while monitoring the wires with a scope. You will apparently be amazed that it will act as a generator -- even though it has not a single magnet or brush assembly at all.
9. You can call me all the names you like.... pseudohuman, that's a new one! ..... but in a week, month, year.... there will STILL be no self-runner demonstrated and there will STILL be people sucking up your money claiming to have one. Fraud? Scam? What do they call it in YOUR country when you try to sell something you do not own or possess? Does calling the money you ask for a "donation" help your legal and moral position at all?

[MarkE]

I get that they lack a clue as to how the machine could output more energy than it inputs, and that's OK.  Free energy is really a very simple thing.  If one puts a sail on a boat, they are capturing and utilizing free energy.  Same thing here, if the machine works as claimed, it's just using a different kind of sail to capture and utilize EM energy.  Although, in the absence of any satisfying explanation as to just how that works, some some hard statistics are going to be needed by those who lack the ability to go and see the machine working as claimed for themselves.  Thrapp seems to have also shown some lights lighting up, although he seems to have failed to provide any convincing evidence that his machine actually does what he claims it does.

I've been researching new energy science for over a decade, and there are people here on this forum that have been doing that for two or three times that long.  In that time I have reviewed more alleged over-unity devices than I care to think about.  I started my research here on this forum when it was hosted as a yahoo group by spending months reviewing over 10,000 posts to find potential devices to investigate further.  I found there is a very common progression followed by people who claim they have built a device that operate over-unity, and the strongest commonality in that progression is the failure of the claimants to provide sound and verifiable statistics that clearly show over-unity operation.

So to put an end to all the bickering, simply provide some sound and verifiable statistics.

Best regards,

FB

Timothy Thrapp has a long history of making false free energy claims.  Anything that he says that is not independently corroborated is worthless.

I agree with you: Just show hard evidence of the claim.  If the evidence backs the claim then we can try and come up with an explanation of the extraordinary.