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

[memoryman]

"I'd also like to explore a potential misconception about the CEG and harmonic frequencies."

The greatest misconception about the QEG is the idea that it CAN work. There is nothing in the design or concept that even hints at being possible. If Tesla could see the connection with his work, he would come back from the dead to refute this nonsense.

[F_Brown]

"I'd also like to explore a potential misconception about the CEG and harmonic frequencies."

The greatest misconception about the QEG is the idea that it CAN work. There is nothing in the design or concept that even hints at being possible. If Tesla could see the connection with his work, he would come back from the dead to refute this nonsense.

Until it is shown otherwise by sound methods, I mean work as an under-unity generator.  For that's all I can say about it with certainty at the moment.

After another couple days of number crunching, here's the latest for the secondary side of things. 

[verpies]

I have yet o work out the math for your magnet and super-conductor gizmo, although I expect the law of conservation of mass and energy would apply to this in such a way that if the super-conducting ring has zero current to begin with, then if the magnet was moved a fixed distance into the center of the loop, then withdrawn exactly the same distance, the current in the loop would return to zero, at the end, regardless of how fast the insertion or withdrawal were each separately done.

I just got back.

Yes, I think so too. 
I guess I will have to connect that Whitworth Mechanism to that Magnet over a SC hoop in order to make an absurd machine that will accumulate current in that SC loop.  (see the diagram below - yes I know its a little backwards but turning it around takes a lot of drawing).

...or better yet - an ordinary solenoid winding powered by an asymmetrical sawtooth waveform instead of the reciprocating magnet, to absurdly pump the superconducting loop into destruction with asymmetrical dΦ/dt between two halves of one cycle.

[verpies]

It doesn't happen because the work required for each new withdrawal similarly increases.

Similarly to what?   To the work done by the pull-in ?

Similarly to the current increasing. 

But the work done by the pull-in is proportional to the magnitude of current flowing in that SC loop because the current exerts force on the magnet via the magnetic field it generates.  So Work ∝ Current.
Are you claiming that the integral of force over distance is disproportionate to the current flowing in the SC loop?

For your example of slow in and fast out, after the first cycle the work released pulling in increases each cycle and the work required to withdraw the magnet faster than it gets pulled in increases.

Why?
You have not proven yet that a greater dΦ/dt leaves greater current in the SC loop than smaller dΦ/dt, thus you cannot use that to prove the other statement about disproportionality of work between two halves of the cycle.

This continues until the magnet saturates. 

Only with a real magnet and it is not saturation but irreversible coercive demagnetization.
That limit does not occur in our ideal system and in a real system it can be mitigated.

Ordinary text book induction backs my position.  What backs yours? 

Logic and empiricism.
I do not consider an appeal to authority as proof.

On what basis would you claim that induction fundamentally changes because the conductor gets really really good?

Logic and empiricism.
I don't claim that induction works differently that it does.
I am trying to convince you that induction does not work like you think and a SC loop act like a spring or I'm trying to find a flaw in my thinking with your help.

Lorentz would disagree for the same reasons as Faraday and Maxwell. 

Much of their wisdom is not applicable in this case, because flux lines do not cut the loop and non-zero EMF cannot exist across a SC loop.

A different rate of change of flux changes the image current and the Lorentz force.

In resistive coils cut by flux lines - yes, but in superconductive coils not cut by flux lines - no.
Please prove that I am wrong.

You are greatly abusing the term "conservative".

I don't think so. A magnetic field of a SC loop is conservative analogically to Earth and its gravitation field or mechanical energy stored by a spring..

There is not a fixed quantity of energy stored in a superconductor. 

I never claimed that energy stored in a SC loop is fixed.  I still believe that it is variable and equal to ½LI²

Consider that if there were that superconductors would offer no promise for energy storage.

They do because energy stored in them is still proportional to the product of flux and current flowing in them.
Mechanical springs are also conservative yet they can store energy without problems.

Well I hope you eventually learn something from this.

One of us will

[F_Brown]

Has this wiring scheme been discussed here yet?

I tried using an additional transformer in the primary to decouple output in my SPICE model and that resulted in only a total of 5kw of output whereas using just a resistive load yielded 10kw output.   I use a transformer without a bypass capacitor though.

On the site they talk about the "black boxes" that WITS uses to decouple output power.

http://www.sustainablemedia.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Self-Looping-principle-2.jpg

http://www.sustainablemedia.co/qeg/