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

[MileHigh]

Hi Descripttime,

It looks like the voltages are reasonable for what you would observe on the secondary if you had six light bulbs in series.   For example, 120 VAC is 339 volts peak-to-peak.  So six times 339 volts is 2034 volts.  Likewise it's reasonable to assume that James had a current sensing resistor on the secondary. At the same time I acknowledge that this is not an official report from the QEG team.  At the same time HopeGirl posted it on her YouTube channel with the title "QEG Overunity."

The fact that one bulb is dimmer than the rest can be explained if you assume it was a 100-watt bulb and the other five bulbs were 60-watt bulbs.

On Facebook Dave stated that someone loaned him the equipment.  It looks like it is pretty certain that Dave is not technical and that's why he did the incorrect power calculation.  Why didn't James correct him?  It's the same phenomenon with respect to Dave that you see on the forums; he likely doesn't know what he is talking about for the technical stuff but he assumes that he is correct anyway and has not admitted his lack of knowledge.  Dave said something like "you can get more power from the primary, we discovered that."  That's nonsense, the primary and secondary are locked together and if you suck power out of the primary then less power will be available on the secondary.  We will see if these misconceptions get cleared up over the next few days.

Carl Cunningham posted my power calculation in Dave's Facebook comment thread eight hours ago, it's now 5:30 PM EDT, and 10:30 PM BST in London, England.  Not a single person in the Facebook comment thread has commented on the power calculation or even acknowledged that it was posted.  I find that disconcerting.  Many non-technical people are fully aware of RMS voltage measurements and know that you use RMS values and not peak-to-peak values to measure AC power.

Right now my assumption is that there was no load on the primary, and the light bulb load was on the secondary, and the scope traces were measuring the voltage and the current for the light bulb load.

For me one of the big mysteries is James.  Was he really an engineer, or is he bluffing and he has always worked as a bench technician?  Was he building test jigs and making the measurements that he was directed to make by the engineers that he worked with?  He is on very shaky ground, he is improvising on the fly and I think he stated that he is going to try the suggestion about putting the load on the primary.  In theory there is no reason to do unusual variations on the design.

Technically, I don't think having a resistive load on the primary or the secondary will make much difference.  Either setup should look more or less like the same Lenz drag load to the spinning rotor.  Either setup will be under unity, and the efficiency is likely to be somewhere between 30% and 40% no matter what they do.  It all goes back to the WITTS gang, they never had anything either.  WITTS has no credibility on the free energy forums and are considered by the majority of the forum regulars to be scam artists.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Descripttime,

One more comment from your statement:

So that your calculation of 226 W can be real.

Indeed it can be real and when you look at the apparent brightness of the six light bulbs, 226 watts seems to be about right.

In contrast to that, if Dave's wild estimate of nearly 2 kilowatts was actually true, the six light bulbs would simply not be able to sustain that amount of AC power and one of them would quickly burn out and open the circuit.

By the same token if you actually had six 400-watt incandescent light bulbs plugged into the setup, and the power was nearly 2 kilowatts, they would be blindingly bright and they would also produce a lot of heat.  Clearly that didn't happen.

I will just repeat that these are "disconnects" in the testing process that should not be happening if James really knew what he was doing.  James and HopeGirl are on the "professional" side of free energy experimenters.  From my perspective, if you are a pro, then you will be scrutinized in more detail and mistakes will be pointed out.

We will see if any group that builds a QEG will be able to present their data in a credible and professional way.  That includes even if they fail to get over unity.  Unfortunately, there is a good chance that groups that fail to achieve over unity simply won't present any data at all.  They will simply "run away."  That's a possible explanation for the silence from the engineering group in Taiwan.

MileHigh

[ariovaldo]

A few comments:

The E=mc^2 equation is only for energy equivalent of rest mass.  For a mass in motion a kinetic energy component most also be added as the posted image shows, for a mass at rest the kinetic energy component is still actually there, it's just zero.

The mass differential between the electron and proton comes in to play in plasma physics, where electrons can be put into motion much more quickly than their positive counter parts.  This gives rise to some interesting things as the electrons in a plasma will arrive at a positive terminal before the positive ions will arrive at the negative terminal. 


Ari,

Do you have your load attached to the primary or secondary of your QEG, and what is the DC resistance of the primary?

A) High voltage coil ( 3100 turns of 20 awg wire)
33 Ohms
13 Farad without rotor
18 Farad With the rotor


B) Low voltage coil ( 350 turns of 2X16 awg wire)
1.0 ohms
0.26 Farad without the rotor
0.32 Farad with the rotor


Cheers
Ariovaldo

[TinselKoala]

I am continually amazed by how these people, and others of their ilk, measure "output power". They all act as if the measured output power was a property of the device under test, rather than the load itself.

Consider this: You have a power source, the mains outlets in your home. Plug in a 100 Watt nameplate value incandescent bulb, and _measure_ the power output of the wall socket. What do you get? 100 Watts or thereabouts, if you have done it right.
Now unplug that bulb and plug in a 1500 Watt electric heater. Measure the power output. What do you get? 1500 Watts, or thereabouts. But NOTHING about your mains plug has changed! It is still the same plug connected to the same wiring all the way back to the power plant.

So what gives? Why didn't this source put 1500 watts into the light bulb, why didn't it put 100 watts into the electric heater? Because the power drawn from the source is determined by the LOAD, not the supply, that's why,  as long as the load doesn't want more power than the supply can provide. With a purely resistive load, it is the _resistance_ of the load that determines the _current drawn_ by the load at the _supply voltage_. 

Is this starting to make sense? So for someone to claim "2 kW" power output.... one MUST have a real load that will draw enough current at the supplied voltage to result in 2 kW power dissipation in the load.

Wiki says,

The actual resistance of the filament is temperature dependent. The cold resistance of tungsten-filament lamps is about 1/15 the hot-filament resistance when the lamp is operating. For example, a 100-watt, 120-volt lamp has a resistance of 144 ohms when lit, but the cold resistance is much lower (about 9.5 ohms).

So to keep six 100 Watt incandescents in series fully lit, you need to supply 720 volts to a resistance of 864 ohms.... and the current will be I=V/R= 0.83 Amps, and the power dissipation will be.... wait for it..... I²R= 600 Watts. And this power is determined by the LOAD, not the source, as long as the source is capable of providing the current that the load demands.

So a real 2kW power output would be, say, 20 ea.  100 Watt bulbs in a 10-series, 2- parallel arrangement? So you "only" need to supply 1,200 volts to a resistance of  720 ohms.... resulting in a current demand of 1.67 Amps.... and the power dissipation will be 2000 Watts. How about that.

So where is the instrumental measurement that shows, simultaneously and in-circuit, the 1,200 volt output of the device and a current of 1.67 amps being drawn by the load?

And then.... when you realize that all of the above voltage and current values are RMS.... and that the peak voltages will be 1.4 times the RMS and the peak-to-peak of the AC signal will be nearly 3 times the RMS values..... you will be looking at some mighty large values on the oscilloscope traces to show a true 2 kW output.

As an aside note, in the most recent photos from Morocco I can see a current sense transformer of the Rogowski coil type being used for current monitoring. Are they using it properly? Highly unlikely, judging from the photos.

The bottom line is that, once again, we are being treated to outlandish claims of overunity, being made on the basis of incorrect and improperly performed measurements done with equipment that is being used improperly _but which is capable of making the proper measurements_. Yet the individuals doing the measuring will NOT listen to advice and use the equipment that they have, properly, to make and interpret measurements correctly. Meanwhile the naive cheering section continues to chant and moan in ecstasy over a few light bulbs lighting up, poorly and with lots of noise.

[Farmhand]

Ari what are we looking at in the picture ? Is it part of the core and windings over wrapped by tape with an arc burn mark between ?

I have to say that people doing this kind of thing should definitely make provision for limiting the voltage in the tanked coils. Similar things can happen with NST's when they are open circuited when tuned by caps or used in resonant transformer supply duties, same with MOT's, MOT's have the secondary electrically joined to the core so the windings closest to the core are tied to the same potential by the inside end of the secondary winding. The potential difference between winding might remain fairly low but the potential difference to the core could be great.

James' voltage limiter is the spark gap which is not good for a home use device as a consistent sparking of a spark gap could interfere with things.

For unqualified people to use it the device needs fail safes and inbuilt protections, which is another concern, people think they can just wire up some 10 kW device
to their homes and hey presto. But it is a bit more complicated than that.

For example James and Hope Girl Turn up and drop off a free QEG to your house but you are not an electrician and cannot wire it to your house. What do you do ?

I doubt any electrician would do it. Not unless he sees a safety certificate and a technical report with clear schematics is my guess.

So then what, if you connect it to your house yourself or get an unqualified or even if you could find a qualified person to install it then if the setup kills someone both you and the installer are liable, if the house burns down you get no insurance.

This is Hillbilly electronics, and even if it was to "work" would have a lot of work to do to be able to install one in a house.

..