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

[isim]

Thanks for yours criticals comments.

New step for FixTheWord  ...  Perou:
http://xi4.com/nikola-telsa-q-e-g/

I have post there, to report the QEG fails!
See the attachement!

[PCB]

@isim Your a bit late to the party. They are starting to use rms values in their actual power calculations, moreover they claim to now have achieved overunity.


http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/393-qeg-morocco-overunity


I already posted want what you just posted which can be sean here  http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/386-qeg-morocco-overunity?start=12  together with few comments back. This is not a very active forum, just a handful of postings each day. You can see them here:

This is old news now, and I'm waiting for more details on their new power readings, if and when they provide them. It does not behoove use to keep beating the same drum, the point has already been made and recieved several days ago.

[MarkE]

@isim Your a bit late to the party. They are starting to use rms values in their actual power calculations, moreover they claim to now have achieved overunity.

We don't know what they are using for their calculations.  We know only that they are now labeling some reported values as rms.

http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/393-qeg-morocco-overunity

The message from James freely mixes different power measurement methods.  There is no telling whether the correct normalization was performed prior to making comparisons.

I already posted want what you just posted which can be sean here  [size=78%]http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/386-qeg-morocco-overunity?start=12[/size] together with few comments back. This is not a very active forum, just a handful of postings each day. You can see them here:

This is old news now, and I'm waiting for more details on their new power readings, if and when they provide them. It does not behoove use to keep beating the same drum, the point has already been made and recieved several days ago.

The point has been made.  AFAIK, FTW has not done anything to clear up the muck that they have stirred.

[PCB]

The message from James freely mixes different power measurement methods.  There is no telling whether the correct normalization was performed prior to making comparisons.

Its fine to mixed things along as your clear.  If you are going to use peak-to-peak values use the term instantaneous power.  The mistake Dave made was to failed to understand that the power meter on the input side measured true rms value, while he did the math use the instantaneous power value for the output. But we have gone through this already ad nauseum.  It needs also to be said that all the posted analysis only applies to sinusoidal waveforms. Its highly likely that the QEG produces harmonics, so the output voltage and current are not strictly sinusoidal, but good enough.


Not really sure what you mean by "the correct normalization", unless your referring to the current sensor. What is clear from the latest Jamie posting it they are claiming overunity, where he did quote the actual power out put to be 1590W for an input of 800W, 2x overunity. However, like every body else, the real proof of onverunity is if they can self loop it.

[FR Turbo]

I've been lurking for a while on this forum, while following the QEG development.  Just a background, I have a BS EE and my PE in EE/Power but that really doesn't mean jack because A) I wasn't the greatest student B) I haven't really used anything I learned since graduating C) that was almost 20 years ago D) I work in the design/consulting field on commercial construction (so I size service and branch feeders for construction documents, that's about as complex as it gets).  But, I do have a scientific mind and I am an out-of-the-box thinker.  Perhaps this has been to my detriment in the past as I have been involved in things like MLMs, but I learned a lot from all of that, #1 being the ability to spot that mentality immediately, and being aware of that pattern and the ability to sift through to get the real information (notably, being able to know when someone is intentionally evading a legitimate question).

My initial interest in OU was sparked by the Aquagen HHO system oh, about a decade or so back.  It was a fleeting interest that never really took off but I would occasionally check up on that technology, then I got married and had a kid and all my free time was gone.  The QEG has re-sparked my interest and now I see that it is a whole new world of thought, thanks to this and many other forums, etc.  So if anything, it's pulled me back into this subject, and if in the end that's all I get out of it, so be it.

So with that being said, I can tell you that while there is not a lot of information being directly shared on this forum (or really any other) relative to the work being done, that does not mean that nothing is being done and that does not mean that the intent of those working on the QEG is to keep everything secret.  There are many teams that are working to get things together for initial builds and testing.  I know that at least one of these teams is planning to do a wide array of testing and troubleshooting and they will be sharing what they have found with all.  The intent of these groups is to collaborate and develop the system and provide results, whether they prove or disprove the machine.

The generally accepted philosophy of any of the groups that I am in touch with is to maintain this system fully as open source.  Whether or not everyone subscribes to the methodologies of FTW is a topic that I would prefer to stay away from, personally, but let's just say that my past experiences in life in general as previously stated will come in useful - been there, done that, not drinking it, ever again.  Sharing the concept as an open source, yeah I can do that, and if it works, I'm the one that will want to understand why and how and be able to explain it.

In my lurking time here I can see that there are many brilliant and insightful minds at work here.  It is my hope that those willing to help will do so with a certain level of patience for me at least, as I will likely have many questions that will make me look like I have no clue what I am talking about, but that's not because I'm stupid, it's because I'm scraping off a lot of rust and putting to work an area of my intellect that I have not really exercised in a long time.  This is mainly due to trauma induced by my 2 semester long course on electromagnetic field theory taught by John Basart at Iowa State University in which every single problem in the textbook was assigned and we all had to meet 3 times a week for 2 hours to separate out the problems and teach each other how we got the answers because he taught the course like we were working on our masters degrees, I'm telling you, it was hell.  Only now, I wish I hadn't sold the textbook.  Actually, now I wonder if I might still have it in a box in the basement.........

Anyways, I believe, from what I've seen on here (across many, many threads that I have spent hours reading), that there are those who are willing to help with solving various issues that will undoubtedly arise.  I've seen some great insights made on this thread already.  I will also state here that I cannot totally disagree with the opinions many have shared, but I am really only interested in the mechanics and workings of the machine and finding solutions.  I do not really plan on debating and/or defending anything that is outside of that.  I'm looking for the proof and I'm looking for that in replication by multiple teams and if I can afford it, myself as well.

There are more builds scheduled to be done by various independent teams.  These are the teams to watch for.  I know that Torelco is working on the issues related to the core insulation and incorporating vacuum impregnation.  People are working on parts sourcing to reduce cost, some have said that they might be able to get the cost reduced by a significant margin, meaning more people will be able to perform builds and testing.  The more teams do this, the better - as long as everyone is willing to share their data and solutions.

Having said all of that, I find myself awash in a sea of information on this site.  There is so much information on here to absorb, it's crazy.  I also find myself dealing with the harsh reality that I am really behind.  I mean, I haven't touched an oscilloscope since college in 1996.  I used SPICE and MATLAB back then, back when you pretty much had to write the code like you were programming...it's a little different now!  I've never hand-wound a core, not that I can recall at least (maybe to make an electromagnet in high school or something).  I got myself a breadboard and an arduino and a bunch of parts from the Shack last year and had about 2 days to play with it until life re-directed me.  Everyone on here talks in a technical language that I can generally follow, but I sometimes have a hard time understanding fully (which is why I say be gentle).

So anyways...back to work for the rest of the day, cheers...Bud