Welcome to our site! EDAboard.com is an international Electronics Discussion Forum focused on EDA software, circuits, schematics, books, theory, papers, asic, pld, 8051, DSP, Network, RF, Analog Design, PCB, Service Manuals... and a whole lot more! To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Hi, never experimented on this one, but I read up on it a few months back. I'm planning to build it as soon as I can get hold of the core material.
About the 'free energy' thing. No energy is free, and apparently a Mr Tom Bearden claims it uses the input power to 'exctract' power from the Aether. Of course I could be wrong, so please correct me if I've mis-quoted him. I don't have a PhD (just a humble BSc) but to me it seems that its merely using enery from the magnet, albeit in a very efficient way, since losses are only in the core, coils and electronics. To me the 'power gain' comes from the magnet, which had to be magnetised at some point, whether its man-made or natural. So eventually the magnet will demagnetise, so it won't work forever (maybe a 1000 years?).
Its interesting though, and JLN labs is a fantastic website, the people there are probably the only scientists investigating so called 'pseudo-science' using proper controlled experiments. If he says it produces more power than is inputed, them I believe him. It might be a good thing to build to power low-power devices from smaller batteries, or to make the batteries in something, last longer.
This is probably a pointless reply, but its good to know someone else has seen things like this (pseudo-science has become a hobby of mine). Just to recap, for the MEG device:
Power Out = Power IN + Magnetic power.
I'll post here when I've built the sucker, with results.
is the patent. What is not stated is that power is needed (either electrical or mechanical) to switch the flux between two paths. This device looks in effect like a switching power supply.
actually it is much more... there are several patents on this sort of zero point energy devices and you can not be issued a patent unless the device works. the current problem is that they work on very small scale (micro watts) .. but they do work. there are 3 sources of free energy, batteries, radiated energy and magnets. basically the 3 sources all have one thing in common the ability, although difficult, to generate and maintain a dipole. it gets complicated...
anyway you can laugh but its based on real science validated by mathematics and experiments. it was first described mathematical by Maxwell in his *original* EE equations because the originals included "free energy" terms. later on Lorenz ommitted the terms because they were negligable. poof... Ohms law is born. A few years later Nikola Tesla (i hope you know who this guy is...) decided to experiment with the "free energy" terms. try to put in experiment this mathematical idea and he was successful in doing so (see his lab notes on radiated energy experiments). at the time he was more excited about publishing the results in terms of communication, wireless communication, and was made very popular and made him wealthy. he never really figured out how to make radiated energy useful other than for communication, but he nevertheless made some patents on it just incase they became useful later... then he died. (RIP)
skip ahead about 80 years and you have a guy named Edwin Gray who built a regenerative system used to power a 100hP motor using Nikola Tesla's ideas but with "modern" technology. he built 5 "free energy" devices and sent them out around the world before he was shot and killed in his lab.
skip ahead about 15 years after his death, internet is born. information is freely traded and pictures of working Edwin Gray devices circulate. discussion groups are formed, devices are tested and results shared. patents are made (another one by John Bedini just last year!) and a revolution is born.
I have just read the patents by Edwin Gray. They do not claim any creation of energy. One takes the inductive kick back of an inductive load and instead of dissipating it in heat in a snubber network, directs it to a storage device for reuse. Reducing losses is far different from having over 100% efficiency in energy conversion. The other patent was for a new kind of electric motor and made no claims of efficiencies over 100%.
you can not make a claim of over unity in a patent or the patent office will think you have a perpetual motion device and instantly reject the application. but over unity is exactly what is happening. it works by using an open loop system and attracting an external source to be a part of the circuit.
don't worry too much about that though. patent offices are a waste of your time (for so many reasons) unless you are a big corporation (i.e. sales in the billions). perpetual motion devices are alive and well, they are just not recognized as such (but that doesn't make them cease to exist!). take superconductivity for example. once energy is imparted on a circuit to instigate the flow of electrons around a circuit that is in a state of superconductivity those electrons (the current0 will continue to flow, around and around and around. in fact, the half life is something like 10 to the 23 years! that movement of electrons will last longer than the expected life of our solar system. to me, this is "perpetual" or close enough. the only thing is that the electrons flowing in the supercondutivity circuit do *not* perform work. they are not lighting a light, powering a stereo. nothing. but since when has the definition of a perpetual motion device include the statement that is "must also perform useful work". i digress..
edwin gray's patent does something quite unique. some of the high voltage energy used to turn the motor while the other half is used to recharge the battery. thus the battery always stays charged up and the motor continues to spin. huh... interesting.
it is only considered an over unity device (as all such devices are) in the way that the efficiency of the human built circuit is greater than one. of course, the SYSTEM, is not over unity. but humans care not for the use of energy from a source that is self regenerative and virtually in exhaustable.
there is no commercially viable product yet. however, here is one company that says they will have one ready by the end of the year. hey, you don't even have to wait that long to see if its a hoax or not.
Flatulent, good to see that you thoroughly read the patent, most devices I've seen simply increase the efficieny of a motor/generator system, harnessing back-EMF.
Mr. Cool, I agree with you on some points. Most people will assume that a 'free-energy machine' is a closed system (energy from nowwhere) but obviously, there is no such thing as a 'closed system'. And even if you could block all known forms of energy entering/interacting with a system, we don't know everything, there must be other forms of energy out there (cue the X-files theme...).
But, you've mentioned some great names in physics, Tesla, Lorentz, and of course Maxwell, whose originial equations apparently involved 'quartions' an area of maths long since forgotten, (so any 'new' interpretation of these equations are useless). But, I've read on many pages claiming that maxwells equations have been mis-interpreted, or Lorentz was wrong, or Tesla made a death ray. The problems lie in the fact that I've yet to see any evidence to back up these claims. This doesn't mean they're simply 'made-up' but its hard to believe someone when they simply 'tell you' what happened. Also people seem to copy information from other pages, and mis-quote, without understanding the true mechanisms and implications. It's a global game of chinese-whispers, where new technology gets lost.
Many many poeple are working on these COP>1.0 devices, but to me it's obvious there is one problem. People are completely polarized on the matter (dipoles )
On the one hand we have hundreds of both professional and amateur physicists/engineers making patent after patent and preaching to the world that they have created 'free-energy'. And on the other, there are scientists who have grown up learning all about the theories that modern technology is based on, and simply refuse to believe anything else, regardless of evidence. Any idiot can see that even science is based on opinion, and therefore, is neither right nor wrong (good 'ol quantum theory, where anything goes). I really hope that serious investigations by professional companies will be carried out, regardless of how silly an idea sounds. I've seen hundreds of pages on the net with people providing plans, discussing, and even selling(!) such ideas. Their credibility is marred by the terminology they use, being somewhat 'unscientific'. Of course this should have no bearing on the design or idea, even if they do claim that its powered by 'human love and spirit' (yes, I've seen a device that 'apprently' creates 3v from pure love)
Also, misunderstanding of modern ideas have swamped the guys (or ladies) that have really got something. Lastly many 'pseudo-scientsts' slate physics that is taught today claiming 'it's all wrong, completely wrong' which I believe is utterly ludicrous. But to say that every single theory in physics/science is perfect is just as bad. After all, I'm sure you were all taught that the only thing an experiment proves is that your experiment works, your interpretation determines the outcome.
Someone has probably made a mistake somewhere down the line, why haven't we explained why inertial constant is identical to the graviational constant?
Anyway, I'm ranting, admin, please feel free to delete this if you thing it's useless, which it probably is.
BuriedCode.
Ps, I hate the term 'free-energy'. Energy doesn't just appear, and it's not 'free'. But I'm not doubting the possibility of there existing vast quantities of it available 'on tap'. Someone please think up a clever buzz word to replace it
This whole area of amateur science has a lot of quacks. I once read a report by an astronomer who claimed that the speed of light was changing. He took the measurements over the past and claimed they had no error. The differences in measured value was caused by the speed actually changing. He then extrapolated the points back in time. All of his references were to sophomore physics books used at mundane quality schools and showed a lack of understanding of what was presented. One of his fellow variable speed cronies did "research" several decades ago to show that razor blades stored in pyramid shaped containers lasted longer.
buriedcode - i appreciate your feedback, your comments are honest. for me, i think in the same terms. perhaps i would add that an experiment does in fact prove facts, if only until another experiment can prove otherwise (theory of relativity as example).
indeed if free-energy were in fact possible, wouldn't it already be invented/discovered? society as a collective whole is moving very fast actually faster than what we can keep up with (think on that, it will boggle the mind). something that would have taken 10 years to research now takes 1. instant sharing of ideas and communication with anyone anywhere at anytime, tools to increase the processing speed of mundane calculations and technology that is seemingly capable of anything just being a matter of complexity is all. yet here we are... with no free energy? so is it just conspiracy theory? so many people scamming people raising investment funds for a "free energy" device only to come up with nothing time & time again (Bruce A. Perreault comes to mind).
but on the other side notable respectable people *did* believe in free energy. nikola tesla for one, a guy you can trust. though he really only theorized on the subject but never really built a working model. Dr. T. Henry Moray who actually DID build it. Lt. Col. T.E. Bearden who spent 30 years investigating the math behind it to prove once and for all it could be true (he wrote a book on the subject, highly recommended). so there must be something out there... right? (x-files music que).
for myself i can only say that i have a profound sense that free-energy exists, or will exist in my lifetime. i am interested in discovering for myself if this is true.. at least i can trust that source of information! ha and if nothing ever comes from my experimentation in the form of true free energy, at least i will have learnt something; and education of any nature is never a waste.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
