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

[chrisC]

Well Jamie does mention 175W rms output in his latest posting so he certainly understands how power in calculated, less in fact then MileHigh estimated. That doesn't change the fact that HopeGirl started fund raising off of a bogus claim of overunity. Jamie now says they are getting 1590W RMS power output for 800W input. At least he is being somewhat more careful in his reporting. This is the first report I believe of excess power so self looping should be there next goal I would think. I wish them luck that they will achieve this shortly.

Here's that link:  http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/393-qeg-morocco-overunity#1677


The world should just wait a while and give him a chance, instead of bad mouthing him from the start. James is no dummy. Too many people on these forums just wants to show that they understand some electricity principles like AC measurements and rms values. Maybe there are deeper things they don't understand?


cheers
chrisC

[MarkE]

Here's that link:  http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-news/393-qeg-morocco-overunity#1677


The world should just wait a while and give him a chance, instead of bad mouthing him from the start. James is no dummy. Too many people on these forums just wants to show that they understand some electricity principles like AC measurements and rms values. Maybe there are deeper things they don't understand?


cheers
chrisC

This part is not encouraging.  He insists that everyone should be using peak to peak values, and then he freely mixes in rms labels without stating whether he is still using peak values or has scaled them.  He makes no statement as to how he is measuring his input power.  If he is reading it from an instrument like a "Kill-a-Watt", that instrument does not report peak to peak voltage times peak to peak current. 

There is no good reason not to use consistent measurements.  Is this choice to mix in peak to peak voltage and current readings a problem with naivete, or is it an intentional effort to mislead?

Here's what I've got so far. Firstly, I want to make sure we're all using peak readings at this point. Can you confirm? So here is the data from 3100 turn coils loop wired as secondary: At 2588 RPM (173Hz output frequency), for 1000W input (at the wall), I'm getting 3000W output. At 600W input, It's 1360W, and at 500W in, I've got 836W out. I'm using roughly the same cap value in series (167nF) as the original config., with the six 100W, 240 volt lamps in the loop as the load. So it's just the original C value, in series with the six lamps. For the 350 turn coils loop, I'm using 14.2uF in series, with no R value in the loop. I don't have any high wattage variable resistors here, but I have an 1800 W (30 ohms) heating element that I want to try in the circuit today.

I may be able to move the tap on the heating element... Some things I've noticed: With this configuration, I've actually got 3 resonances as I spin up the rotor (to 2588 RPM). The 1st and 2nd do not phase lock (I can dial right through) and are multi-phasic (power going back and forth as Jeremy mentions), and when I get to the 2588 RPM main resonance, the phase lock is amazing! I can vary the input power between about 500W to over 1000W and RPM change is less than 5. If I increase the cap value (to about 200nF), I get a resonance at very low RPM (about 1200) that really locks in, and has even more power (measured 4200W), but there is some sinewave distortion (peaks are not all the same amplitude) and it's really too slow mechanically. The main resonance has a clean sinewave.

I remembered Evens said there was also power in the 350 turn coils (as primary) with this configuration, so I decided to see how much... and this was a big surprise... at 86Hz (half of output frequency), I measured 9,460W with 600W input, and 13,326W at 800W input! I verified with a current probe, and there is over 6 amps in the circuit! At 800W input, this is about 1590W RMS - enough to power the motor. I measured the output from the 350 turn loop previously with the original configuration, and with 700W input, I had only 1,836W peak (about 175W RMS).

[chrisC]

This part is not encouraging.  He insists that everyone should be using peak to peak values...

Mark:
I really don't think you should intentionally misread him. He was just making sure everyone started with some basis measurement that every scope reads ie peak values; after all not everyone has rms enabled sampling scopes. Chill out. Wait for a while for more solid measurements before pouring hot oil on some hard working soul. As for Hope girl, I can't speak for her - she's probably delusional on some cult goddess.
cheers,
chrisC

[PIH123]

The world should just wait a while and give him a chance.........................

Agreed, the world should wait ( Including STOPPING funding ) until such time that something which has been promised or CLAIMED is achieved.


But wait, haven't we already hit that point.

According to James himself in Sterling Allan's video interview with him and HopeForMoreFundingGirl back in April
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJKE5DJRMFQ
at  20:28 – James states that he has already tested it up to 9300 watts  (he corrected himself from 10 Kw, so obviously that is not an estimation of what is possible, but what has been achieved).
He claims 10 more out than in. Not in theory, but already achieved.

And that all it needs is a simple inverter to self loop. He makes it sound like it would take no more than an hour or so to achieve. But they were just so excited to share their discovery...................

Has James put an inverter on his completed build?     9.3 Kw achieved remember.
Haven't Taiwan put an inverter on their completed build?
And the hum-dinger for me:      Have the 3000 plus (claimed at the gofundme site) engineers from China that worked with them in Taiwan (all sorts of visa issues stated on the video) had time to follow up on this? Would be fairly simple for 3000 engineers to get this going if you have already gone to the trouble of international travel in this involvement.

So since claims have been that OU has been achieved, it must be time to start examining those claims and all associated evidence.

[PIH123]

He was just making sure everyone started with some basis measurement that every scope reads ie peak values; after all not everyone has rms enabled sampling scopes. Chill out.

So are you saying that maybe not everyone has RMS capable measuring technology?
Fair enough.
So everyone should use peak – to –peak values for both output AND INPUT.
Agree ?

So why is that kill-a-watt device in the "Morrocco overunity achieved" video measuring RMS input.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwgkCweVpt0 at 1:35

It is used (incorrectly) as the evidence that overunity has been achieved, and to subsequently source more funds.

Please re-read (and digest) post #1034 by TK that explains all about output power.
Once you understand that output power is "drawn" by the load, it may become obvious why some dimly lit bulbs highlight the issues with the output power claims.
We can clearly (visually) see the evidence (without the need for misrepresented scope and / or meter measurements).
At 0:14
In the video above, 6 bulbs of around 100 W stated rating are drawing less than 60 percent of their max load.  Output power anyone ?  Is it over 655 rms as measured with the "kill-a-watt".

So I bench tested with the same bulb setup (I only had a box of 75 Watters, but visually, theirs were slightly more dimly lit than mine), whereby the last bulb only just light up as evidenced in the videos. Guess what power was being drawn ?
Hint : it was within 10 watts of one of the values given in MH's post #1021
I can also tell you it was not in the range 600 to 700 W

If you want to wait and ignore the evidence, fine.
But it is so blatant, and somewhat surprisingly (to me at least) is pointing to the fact that James knows fully well what is going on judging by his words and actions.
I first thought it was the girl that was leading the fraud, either willfully or through ignorance.
But now I know that James is not the claimed skilled Engineer or is a fully paid up, card carrying member of the scam team.
These are very basic mistakes and hence are being willfully made.