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

[MarkE]

Mark,

As I said, I have not tested the mains version but I have built and tested the solid state low voltage version.

Can you explain to me why I'm seeing the opposite happening when testing my solid state low voltage setup?
When the center coil is tuned close to the oscillator frequency then I get very good output. When the center
coil is tuned far from the oscillator frequency then I get very poor output.

GL.

Sure it's because I didn't look closely enough.  A series resonant configuration imposes minimum series impedance at resonance.  If the capacitor were in parallel to the windings then it would be a parallel resonant network and would pass minimum power from the input to the output at resonance.  The other thing to note is that it is the uncoupled inductance, IE the apparent leakage inductance that contributes to the LC tank.  The coupled portion does not.

[Groundloop]

Sure it's because I didn't look closely enough.  A series resonant configuration imposes minimum series impedance at resonance.  If the capacitor were in parallel to the windings then it would be a parallel resonant network and would pass minimum power from the input to the output at resonance.  The other thing to note is that it is the uncoupled inductance, IE the apparent leakage inductance that contributes to the LC tank.  The coupled portion does not.

Mark,

Thank you for taking time to look at this.

GL.

[TinselKoala]

So where does the "Overunity" leak in, then?   

That is, what is it about these common circuits that makes people like Thane Heins, Bill Alek, the QEGites and others believe that they are, or could be, OU in any way? How are they seduced into making measurements that indicate, to them, that there is something unusual or new happening in the circuits? Is it simply the voltage rise in the resonant tank?

[Groundloop]

So where does the "Overunity" leak in, then?   

That is, what is it about these common circuits that makes people like Thane Heins, Bill Alek, the QEGites and others believe that they are, or could be, OU in any way? How are they seduced into making measurements that indicate, to them, that there is something unusual or new happening in the circuits? Is it simply the voltage rise in the resonant tank?

Hi TK,

Are you talking about my circuits posted here?

I have not claimed any OU in those circuits, ever. My goal with those circuits is to make a low loss
unit for powering mains voltage LED bulbs from one 1,5 Volt D-cell battery.

GL.

[TinselKoala]

Hi TK,

Are you talking about my circuits posted here?

I have not claimed any OU in those circuits, ever. My goal with those circuits is to make a low loss
unit for powering mains voltage LED bulbs from one 1,5 Volt D-cell battery.

GL.

I am talking about circuits virtually identical to yours, using coupled toroidal or other styles of transformers, "Bitoroids" or William Alek's transformers or many others we see, such as the QEG itself. I know that _YOU_ do not make such mistakes or claims.

But why-how do other people find it so easy to fool themselves with these kinds of circuits involving coupled toroidal transformers, or other shapes of transformers? We see it all the time. You may recall that we have even seen at least one actual Professor of Physics, formerly at a well-respected university, claiming that a simple Joule Thief circuit was massively OU.

I think it is the resonant rise, combined with a lack of understanding of reactive "power", combined with a general misunderstanding or poor understanding of power measurements in general. But it would be good to have a more rigorous analysis of this "fail" than I can provide, so I am asking you and MarkE and whomever else may be interested (and qualified) to help explain how spurious measurements in these circuits can lead to false claims of "overunity".