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

[Cap-Z-ro]

Captain Zero:

The problem is that your rebuttal stops after the "holes."  You have nothing to say past that point.

Read this and weep:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois_Theatre_fire

MileHigh

I didn't mean for you to look in the hole in your head...silly goose.

[TinselKoala]

Well said Luc
Check out post 389
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/16584-analysis-witts-generator-13.html
It ain't over yet.

That is hilarious! UFOPolitics has been carrying on his motor-rewinding thread for well over a year, hasn't made a single Joule of "free energy" and hasn't made any improvements over standard motor winding efficiencies, but a lot of people have spent a lot of time and money entertaining him and giving him a platform for his pronouncements. How many blown mosfets have that group accumulated, I wonder?

So now he's got time to spare, and he's telling everyone about the QEG and how it's supposed to work. What a laugh! He should join their "Team"... he needs a vacation to exotic foreign lands, I can tell.

[MileHigh]

Now let's complicate it slightly.
In your example above the cause of the inductance change was not given.  It was just abstractly assumed to happen somehow.
In the following exercise, I will attempt to give it a real cause.

Let's propose that the change in inductance is caused by an ideal ferrite core at rest being attracted into that ideal air coil from far away, in absence of gravity, so that its inductance changes from 1H (when the core is away) to 3H (when the core is inside the coil).  See the graph below for a realistic relationship between the core's distance and the inductance of the coil (taken from a real linear motor).
According to your calculations when the core is away the current flowing through the coil is 8.66A and when the core is inside the coil the current flowing in it is 5A. ...Fine.

Let's assume that the acceleration of the core into the coil from 10cm away takes 100ms and when the core reaches the middle of the coil its speed is 1m/s.
10µs before the core reaches the middle of the coil, a switch is opened and all of the energy stored in the coil (37.5J) is discharged into an ideal capacitor in 10µs.  Now all of the energy is in the capacitor and no current flows through the coil. At this point the capacitor is disconnected from the coil (so it cannot recharge the coil back) and the massive core continues on its path with constant velocity because now the coil is opened and has no current flowing in it, thus it cannot exert any force on the departing core.

But wait!  Now, we have all of our input energy recovered in a capacitor but the departing core has significant remaining kinetic energy 

Verpies,

A very interesting puzzle indeed and I thought about it.

Think about this:  When the ideal core is being attracted to the ideal coil, that's a linear motor action that's taking place.  The ideal core still has mass.  The coil is transferring some of its stored energy and it's being converted into the kinetic energy of the moving core.  So just before the capacitor charging through the diode will take place, the current flowing in the coil will be _less_ than 5 amperes.  We know that a "motor action" will cause a voltage drop inside a coil.  In the case of this example, as the core accelerates towards the ideal coil, there will be an "internal counter-EMF" taking place inside the loop of the ideal coil that effectively reduces the current to lower than 5 amperes.   So the current in the coil will decease due to two factors, 1) the increased inductance, and 2) the internal counter-EMF from the motor action.

After the capacitor is charged up and the mass of the core continues past the now-dead ideal coil, the kinetic energy in the core plus the potential energy in the capacitor will still total to 37.5 joules.

Sounds reasonable?   

MileHigh

[verpies]

So the current in the coil will decease due to two factors, 1) the increased inductance, and 2) the internal counter-EMF from the motor action.

Yes ℰ=-dΦ/dt but Δi ∝ ΔΦ.
If Δi ∝ dΦ/dt that would mean that the current in the coil depends on how quickly you'd allow the core to be attracted into the coil.

What if masses of two ferrites are different but their permeabilities are the same?
Different acceleration, different acceleration period and different dΦ/dt.
...but the same attraction force, the same flux change attempt, the same current change, the same inductance change.

What if the ferrite core collides with a plastic ball of equal mass sitting in the middle of the coil and transfers all of its kinetic energy to it.  Now the ferrite sits motionless inside the middle of the coil and the plastic ball is speeding away.  How does the system "know" that the ferrite was moving just a moment ago, and less energy is supposed to be transferred from a coil loaded with motionless ferrite to the recovery capacitor?

What if a ferrite is repeatedly inserted into a superconducting coil very slowly but withdrawn very quickly (by an external worker) - will the current in the superconductor increase with each cycle until the coil breaks down?

Isn't the decrease of current in the coil simply proportional the integral of the CEMF generated during the attempt to increase the total flux (e.g. the approach) ?
The Lenz law that is responsible for the CEMF doesn't care whether the attempted increase of the magnetic flux happens quickly or slowly (disregarding the dΦ/dt)... as long as the total flux through the coil remains constant before and after approach.

The decrease of current in the coil that follows the increased inductance can be explained in two ways:
1) Energy conservation.
2) Lenz Law's reaction to an attempt to increase the total flux through the coil by the hi-perm core.

[gotoluc]

Question to LUC


These folks that are running this presentation .
What is their previous involvement in benevolent or charitable behavior,do they have a history of helping to open source or giving freely of their time and hard work [Like yourself and many here].


I am being quite serious and honestly do not know the character or these people.
One very big red flag for poor character is the honesty issue which has been referenced here.


or has that been taken out of context??





thx
Chet

Hi Chet,

I don't know the answer to that question. So not knowing, why judge. Even if I knew! why judge?  All actions are accounted for. None can escape cause and effect.

I may use a different approach based on what I understand. Does that make me better then the QEG team?... only if I judge it to be.
Judgement is an action and in time cause and effect will come into play.

Each create and experience their own play based on their actions

Luc