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

[F_Brown]

Thanks for correcting the link. I put this comment on the video.... I won't be surprised, or offended, if you remove it!

---begin YT comment---

Did you expect to see something different? Don't you have any shaded pole synchronous AC motors in your home?

I think you are doing good work with FEMM. You are showing that the simulated device performs exactly as expected. But of course FEMM and all other simulation programs are based on ordinary standard physics, so they won't be able to show you any "free energy" or "overunity" performance. Remember Ibison's Law!

You can optimize all you like, but you can't make this thing produce output power sufficient to loop back to the drive motor for self-running. There is neither theoretical nor empirical support for that, the QEG people do not now and never have had a unit that does, and the version that Timothy Thrapp showed "running" years ago is a fake.

Whether you know it or not, you are participating in a cynical scam, by giving credence to the FTW "saviours of mankind". In a week, a month, a year from now, there will still be no self-running device from those people. But I encourage you to keep on, just try to stay away from the Dark Side of the Force. Asking for donations? Fine... as long as you aren't making unsupported, and unsupportable, claims, like the QEG people are making in their pleas for money.

--- end YT comment---

Fair enough, although if you read though the comments on my YT channel in general, you'll find that I tolerate differing views, unless they are profane or disrespectful.  You raise valid issues.  However, do you have any idea how long it took to make those animations, the better part of a week for the two of them.  The analyses take time to generate, then the video editing takes more time.  The second video is composed of 72 individual analyses.  If someone wants to tip me a dollar or two to buy myself a beer for the vids, I'll take it.  If some one wants to give me enough money to build one of these things, perhaps my 1/2 scale one.  I'll that too, and publish the results.  This is just the kind of thing I find interesting, and this is the new social paradigm for people to get things done:  Get 10,000 honest folks to give $1, rather than getting 1 greedy investor to loan $10,000. 

I spent 10 years investigating inertial propulsion.  All of the credentialed people I talked with said that it also was all the rage in the 80's, and they eventually found out it fails to work.  I wrote two papers one on centrifugal propulsion and one on gyroscopic propulsion,  because I had math that said they would work.  I wrote those papers just to give to those people and say, "If this fails to work, show me where exactly I went wrong."  Every one I gave the papers to either refused to even read them or lacked the ability to articulate anything other than Newton's second law says it will fail to work, or point out exactly where I went wrong.  Finally, I realized that "Centrifugal Force" is a misnomer, and that misnomer perpetuates the misconception that inertial propulsion will work.

I had made a subtle mistake in my presumptions, specifically that centrifugal force was an actual force, as it's name implies, rather than just an inertial reaction to the application centripetal force.  The math was all correct, integrals and all, although it was all based on that erroneous presumption, and that's where I went wrong, before the math even started.  Now, I can explain why inertial propulsion will fail to propel anything in freespace in precise detail to anyone who is interested.

My conclusion is that the credentialed people I asked really failed to understand why it failed to work, they just accepted the official opinion of the scientific establishment that inertial propulsion fails to work.  So much for presuming PhDs actually understand what they are talking about.

Hence my motivation to look into the QEG.

Cheers,

FB 

BTW  I think you'll like how I edited the description boxes for the vids.

[TinselKoala]

Once you get to the Ph.D. level in research, it's pretty much assured that only three or four other people in the world can actually understand what you are talking about.... and conversely, the PhD will only be able to understand fully a very narrow, focussed research paradigm.

Newton's Laws are so firmly embedded in every moving device we have ever made, so it's pretty natural for scientists and especially engineers to dismiss out of hand anything that appears to violate them. So if you want people to pay attention to inertial (or inertialess) propulsion (which I have been doing seriously since 1999) you should put in bold type, right up front, how it does not violate Conservation of Momentum. If you can do that convincingly, then more of the mainstream scientists will take a second look.

If it does violate CofM, you also have an instant Free Energy generator as well as a reactionless propulsion mechanism.


Yes, I do have some idea of the work involved in the sims and the videos. It's a lot of work, and I think that the QEG people should cut you in on their profits!

[F_Brown]

I did actually think you had some idea about the sims. 

You might find it interesting that I did find an over-unity result in simulation for one device.  That was the the Milkovic Two-Stage Oscillator.  I made a model with a multi-body dynamics simulator called Freecad, and it showed up to 2x the input power being dissipated in a linear damper on the output of the device.  The video of that seems to have disappeared from my YT channel, and I did that work on another computer.  It might take me a while to locate it again.

Link to the MBD simulator:   http://www.askoh.com/

[MileHigh]

F_Brown,

That was a very nice simulation and I can see that it was a lot of work.

You state:

Presented is an improved animation of a series of FEMM, Finite Element Method Magnetics, analyses of the flux density in the QEG laminated, silicon steel core with a steady AC signal applied to the primaries of the genator and the secondaries open circuited.  It clearly shows the flux gating in the stator by the rotation of the amature.

It appears that the flux generated by the primaries is subtractive through the toroid itself, and addictive through the rotor.  The primary coils that generate the flux are in the north-east and south-west parts of the toroid.  You should have stated that for your viewers because this type of material will be totally new to some of them.

I am having a hard time seeing the AC component of the flux generation itself.  I see green through bright pink corresponding to low through high flux density, but I don't necessarily see an AC component in the flux generation by the "invisible" coils.  It almost looks like every frame consists of the same DC flux generation from the coils, and the flux intensity is modulated alone by the position of the rotor.

Also, if there is indeed AC flux generation due to AC current through the "invisible" coils you make no comments about the frequency and phase relationship between the flux generation and the rotation of the rotor.

Note that we are often information starved in the realm of free energy.  You did a great job on the animation, but resolving the issues mentioned above would be very helpful.  One of the problems is that when people present their data they forget that the people reading their postings or watching their video clips are not in the "experimenter's bubble."  What the experimenter is doing seems clear and obvious to the experimenter, and they don't realize that the people looking at their presentation are not in their own bubble.  For a details person like me, it drives me nuts.

Take the example of when people do some sort of bench test and they do a YouTube clip and they don't show a schematic.  Sometimes they give you a verbal description of the schematic like they expect you to keep a visualization of the circuit in your head while they run the experiment.  It's ridiculous and nobody can follow and it's a pain for details people.

One last example is where people play with that green magnetic viewing paper.  I have watched dozens and dozens of clips of people using the magnetic viewing paper and I have never seen someone explain what the different shadings in the paper mean.  EMjunkie points to some lines on the magnetic viewing paper and says, "Look, Bloch walls."  I will get into that debate with him next week.

Okay so let me change postings to actually comment on the animation.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

F_Brown,

I am going to assume that the coils that generate the flux through the toroid have DC current flowing through them for each individual frame in your animation like I state in my previous posting.  The AC component of the flux is caused by the rotor position.  Even if this assumption is wrong, it won't affect my main points in this posting.

What you can see in your clip is that when the rotor approaches the vertical or horizontal position, there is increasing flux flowing through the rotor.  That would correspond to magnetic attraction between the turning rotor and the mating components of the toroid.  So during this phase there is clockwise torque on the rotor from the the flux source in the toroid.

Likewise when the rotor is leaving the horizontal or vertical position, there is decreasing flux flowing through the rotor and that would also cause attraction between the rotor and the toroid.  During this phase there would be counter-clockwise torque on the rotor and that corresponds to magnetic drag on the external drive motor, Lenz law in action.

In the real QEG setup that magnetic drag/Lenz law will correspond to the rotating rotor giving a "kick" to the LC resonator and that kick requires mechanical energy that is supplied by the drive motor - you can't escape Mother Nature.

Your animation clearly shows that the rotating rotor will modulate the flux through the toroid-rotating rotor system.  That will stir up changing flux and changing currents through the coils of the LC resonator and also through the output coils into the load.  The timing relationships at resonance will stabilize and there will be magnetic drag that resists the rotation of the rotor, there is no doubt.

As was stated before, this is a kind of glorified pick-up coil on a pulse motor that is driving a capacitor to form an LC resonator.  You set up the timing so the pulse motor rotates such that the pick-up coil LC resonator is driven at the resonant frequency by the magnets passing the pick-up coil.   You end up with a large amplitude AC voltage/current set of waveforms in the pick-up coil and that represents a kind of matched load and a huge power drain.  When you add a load to the pick-up coil LC resonator you start to draw some power away from the LC resonator and the total power drain decreases and the pulse motor speeds up.

Going back to the QEG, understanding what it does in the real world will require producing a complete timing diagram for it tracking what is happening at resonance for all of the currents and magnetic flux flows, the whole nine yards.  You could wrap sensing coils around the four quadrants of the toroid and measure the voltages and then use those voltage waveforms to derive the magnetic flux flows through each of the four quadrants.   You simply integrate on the voltage waveforms with respect to time to get the flux waveforms.  That information would allow you to derive the flux flow through the rotor itself.  You would have to pick up a sensing tick from the rotating rotor so that you could track the rotor angle on your timing diagram.  And so on and so on....

There is almost no point in doing this because nobody is going to measure over unity from this $5000 paperweight.

Beyond that, I don't get the sense that James M. Robitaille would be capable of doing this level of analysis even if he wanted to.  One could expect that none of the New Age hangers-on could do this and their eyes glazed over after reading the first few sentences of this posting.

This is not going to have a happy ending.  If it's true that there are 200 orders for the toroid and coils with the fancy dielectric potting compound at $3000 USD each, that's $600,000 USD.  Six-hundred thousand dollars!  Considering how easy it will be for all of these burned replicators to find each other, one possibility is a class action lawsuit against the perpetrators of this farce.

MileHigh