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

[MileHigh]

Luc,

About the pitch change or lack of change when the light bulbs light up:

Note the light bulbs are like a load on a secondary coil on a toroidal core where the primary is the LC resonator.  So that means it's like the light bulbs are in parallel with the LC resonator.

One thing that the QEG team haven't looked at is the electrical power draw of the LC resonator when it is in resonance without the light bulb load.  I know that I have been harping on this issue and this may give it some perspective.

We know that there is a high-voltage medium-frequency sine wave observed when in resonance and no light bulb load.

We have lots of data to work with:  We know the peak-to-peak voltage.  We know the capacitance value.  We know the resonant frequency.  We know the wire resistance in the L part of the LC resonator.  All of these things are easily measurable.

You can then easily determine the RMS AC current in the LC resonator.  Once you have that, you know the power dissipation in the LC resonator.  I will leave the crunching to anyone that is interested as an exercise.

Let's say that you crunch the numbers and you determine that the unloaded LC resonator is dissipating 110 watts of power.  Don't be surprised it's possible it could be that high.

Now, you add the light bulb load.  All my numbers are approximations for illustrative purposes.  Let's say they are 60-watt bulbs only partially lit and all four draw 130 watts.   Let's say that under load the LC resonance voltage drops a lot.  You crunch the numbers and now the LC resonator only draws 25 watts.  That means that the power picked up by the LC resonator is now mostly going to the light bulb load.

So the electrical power dissipation is 110 watts no load and (130 + 25) = 155 watts with the light bulb load.

Let's say in both cases there is 25 watts worth of friction power also (bearings, air, etc.)

So the new totals are 135 watts no load and 180 watts with the light bulb load.

The DC motor by design will try to maintain a constant speed with the same DC voltage applied, it just draws more current when there is a tougher mechanical load.

The DC motor and the QEC rotor together store a lot of Joules of rotational energy when at the resonance speed.  That rotational inertia will resist a speed change when the mechanical load changes.

You add the two effects together, the motor self-governing on speed and the rotational inertia and it's very possible that the motor speed change is not perceptible over the first few seconds when the mechanical load changes from 135 watts to 180 watts.

This is the kind of stuff we should be seeing on the real QEG forum.  However, the technical posts are few and far between and you have mostly cheerleading and New Age navel gazing instead.

MileHigh 

[MarkE]

@ibreal   I agree it would be nice to have some ?'s answered and measurements but I think they are trying to avoid killing their funding before they work out the kinks.   looking at the videos of rotaille you see a guy in grubby jeans, tee shirt and unshaved.   doesn't look like someone living high on donations.   looks like a guy busting his butt to get this all working right.   all I'm asking is for people to give it some time before bashing the sh*t out of them.

Steeltpu, I agree that they are trying to protect the funding.  JR seems to be on the up and up. 

HG is another matter.  HG routinely over represents what they have.  HG is out there drumming up money for these trips. Why spend time and money traveling the globe before there is a working unit of any kind?  Wouldn't JR be better off concentrating on trying to make a unit work?  No one can get a unit until and if JR ever succeeds.  And that is something that he may never do.  So who benefits from the current course of action?

[MileHigh]

Steeltpu:

seems they should still be given the benefit of the doubt. let 'em show the proof without all the nasty accusations. not suggesting anyone run out and buy parts for this yet. just stop the negative remarkst. if anyone had a clue about the big post Cap-Z-ro made you might begin to understand why that's important. some of the mentally castrated individuals here who think we or they already know everything about everything should take a few lessons from history

Mentally castrated my ass.  Rubbing your tummy and humming to make a QEG work is being mentally castrated.   For all we know, the total "haul" after 200 cores are ordered and all the rest of the parts are purchased will be somewhere around a million dollars.   Hypothetically, what if the margin on the $3000 core is 70% and HopeGirl and James have a deal with the core manufacturer to split the profits.  Then HopeGirl and James walk away with $210,000.

With that kind of money on the table I refuse to give them the benefit of the doubt.  The "lessons from history" argument can easily be debunked.  The "flying machine" one is the prime example.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

F_Brown,

There is a fundamental problem with your modeling of the spark gap.  You are modeling it as a noise source.  I am assuming that is an off-the-shelf component where you can set the parameters,  The fundamental problem is that your model is a power source, and it injects power into the system.  That is a component that allows you to simulate the thermal noise power that you have in most circuits (I assume.)

The spark gap is not a power source, it's the opposite.  Let's say that the air when it breaks down looks like a 70 ohm resistor.  This is a very simplified model, because we know that the voltage across the spark gap changes very little for changes in the current through the conducting plasma.

Therefore a simplified model for a spark gap would be a switch in series with a 70-ohm resistor.  It conducts when the switch is closed and dissipates power.   You have the spark gap modeled as a source of power.

MileHigh

[F_Brown]

Miles,

Where did you get the impression that I am modeling the spark gap in the CEG simulation?

Quite the contrary, I refrained from putting it in the sim.

On the other hand I did employ a sophisticated spark gap model for my simulation and  analysis of the Tesla Hair-Pin Circuit.

That is featured here:  http://youtu.be/N7gPeIVVy0A

You must be considering the noise source that I used to create a bit of noise in the primary circuit to be a spark gap. 

That's just a noise source to provide a few tens of micro-volts to give the parametric excitation something with which to start.  It is a power source, although a very small one.  I think it could be turned off one the oscillations startup. 

It is to just recreate the ambient noise in the circuit that are generated by ambient magnetic fields acting upon the magnetic core of the device.  Without any noise in the primary of the simulation, the oscillations fail to start up.

Anyway, at the moment I doubt the spark gap is going to do anything useful for the QEG.  Any RF noise that it generates will be damped out by the relative huge inductance, voltages, and currents in the primary tank circuit.