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

[TinselKoala]

Yes... you are now seeing what power arcs can do as opposed to mere sparks.

You can see in the video how the commutator segments are dragging power arcs from the brushes, across several segments. This of course means that the commutator isn't interrupting properly nor addressing the coils in the proper manner or timing. It also means that material of the commutator is burning, and you will have pitting, metal erosion and deposition, and the rough surface thus presented to the brushes themselves will ruin them.

These power arcs are formed by the heavy inductances trying to remain connected as you try to disconnect them. You could try a powerful blast of compressed air onto the commutator with the hope of blowing out the arcs, but with as much inductance as you are switching even this will probably fail.

But I do like your multi-element primary spark gap. This will work much better than the QEG team's silly automotive spark plugs, even if they are platinum. Add elements for even more effectiveness. One of the very best performing stationary spark gaps I have used is an original Tesla design: it's made of six heavy and thick nickel washer-like cylinders, stacked on an insulated shaft, with a small gap between each flat cylinder face. Again, blowing with compressed air can help the effectiveness of even this gap by blowing out the spark to produce rapid fall times in the current through the inductors.

[Khwartz]

In a way you are correct.  The measurements appear valid.  To date, I have yet to read anyone question the measurements.  You see, the error is in the interpretation.  The calculations is what is being questioned.  Earlier peak to peaks were announced as the output power.  Should have not be calculated that way.  Or should have used peak to peak for the input.  Now reactive power is being used.  Either method is good for keeping the ball rolling.  The donations soar after the word is out using incorrect interpretations of power.  When you dabble with reactive power you better make it very clear on your calculations and show every phase angle power factor product each step of the way, which by the way no such effort in the report shown.  And as seen on the report and video, the phase angle is very high resulting in much lower true power.

Maybe, but still they could be genuine.

The question is: can we convert reactive power in real power? Or can they?!

Looks it is what Jim Murray looks having succeeded to do. I don't understand how he has but him and Eric Dollard or Bob BABCOK, look to be guys who knows and understand what they do.

For the Morocco QEG, if they know how to do, thinking back to it, it looks to me illogical that the many engineers in Asia would have not be able to provide the means, but who knows!

Cheers.

[Khwartz]

2,000/600= 3.333, not 30. "COPs are one of my specialities in energetic engineering" maybe not.
I did NOT see rms values, but should have.
The VARs are immaterial; the only real power is < 300W.

Indeed the real power is not much on the bulbs. And nice you note my error of deep night mind calculations. Still the ratio is overunity, but yes, as I have insist myself before you, in it not real power under real power.

For the rms values, I told you they in the report.

For you saying "VARs" are immaterial, so how they can be readed?

They are only VARs because of phase shift between current and voltage. If one can succeed to change the phase of one the these two or both, one may be able the synchronise then and convert themm in real power. This may be probably acheived by instent stockage and instant feeding back, I conjecture from Paul Babcok work.

But saying it can't be done just because it doesn't fit with our present personal concepts, is a big jock at the front of History while any true basic breakthrough have been done, from Faraday to Teslat, including Maxwell,  against the concepts of the "so called well educated contempories". You are free to argue against but you will never know what you indeed don't know.

Cheers.

[ACG]

The QEG failing to achieve over unity will have little affect on Hope Girl and her followers. As this can simply be attributed to all of the negative energy directed at them by the none believers. If only we had believed and focused all of our energy in a positive way the QEG surely would have achieved over unity. Ha!

James looked very tired in his last video. His hair looked pretty greasy also. Maybe he should take a shower and lay off for a few days,

That brings to mind a good question.  The report version 2 appeared to have taken roughly 20 minutes to film and measure.  Lets say it took 1 hour.  This report is one of the most detailed information we have gotten.  If so much can come from 1 hour of work, what is it they did for 30 days or however long they were on vacation?  Report version 1 I can imagine took 1 to 2 days because the capacitor to the primary tank was varied to track output.  I'd give them a generous 3 days to do that included the 1 for report version 2.

I'd still like to know where these 30 engineers are and why they have not said one peep.  Same for the 5,000.

[Khwartz]

Obviously some people just don't get it.

All the activity (oscillating power) in the Tank is input from the power supply. Fact or fiction ?

If not where does it come from ? I'm certain that the energy in the tank can be demonstrated to be "from the supply", by careful measurement.

Attaining a large amount of oscillating power in a resonant tank is the easy part thousands of people do it every day. Seeing the "QEG" showing a larger oscillating power than the input power is not even interesting or out of the ordinary.

Many have claimed that the greater oscillating power than input power is OU but none have shown any evidence or argument that is sensible.

Any half descent resonant tank can show a great amount of oscillating power. That is not output. Before energy can go out, it must go in as we cannot make energy.

There is no mechanism I can see for any external energy to enter the device, then be output to an intended load.

I myself have achieved hundreds of watts activity with under 10 watts input. This is nothing more than accumulated energy from the supply.

...

Very thanks for specifying your viewpoint, I think I see now where you wanted to go.

Indeed, we can store a huge amount of resonant activity by means of a very little input and I am fully agree with you it would be not "creation of energy".

Nevertheless, if it was the case we would have a countinous rise that we have not; right?

Then, it is not because you don't see an extra input it doesn't exists; still agree?

This extra input may comes of a, as I call it "electromagnetic venturi like effet": high very sharp or short pics of voltage may impide a capture in the possible "zero point energy", or "Dirac's plenum".

But still the problem is the conversion: to "re-phase" for output, imo.

What do you think?