Mostly PM motor - Joe Flynn motor. My attempt to replicate

[Ted Ewert]

Save your time and money. It's been tried hundreds of times and it doesn't work. The simple "law" that says by merely running flux through the core of a coil will produce electrical energy is WRONG! The MEG is also a fraud.

Ted

[zhorv324]

Sorry of my ignorance but you say that transformer olso cant work. I dont think so

[zhorv324]

I apologies to Jetijs for spamming this trade

[Jetijs]

no need to apologize
Ted has made numerous experiments on this subject over the years, I trust his opinion. Ted, can you please elaborate on the subject a little more so that it isn't just plain "it can not work" thing. Just as you did on your forum talking about all the phase difference that matters and not flux strength itself.

[zhorv324]

Thank you Jetijs . I m only "junior" member of this forum. What i wont to say is ,MEG is not simple to built to rich cop over 1.(maybe impossible).But builders must tray one crucial thing, input coils MUST never "see" the output load.In parallel path motor you don't have output load (coils) and that a reason way motor have same current consumption with different mechanical load And yes I tray

[Ted Ewert]

no need to apologize
Ted has made numerous experiments on this subject over the years, I trust his opinion. Ted, can you please elaborate on the subject a little more so that it isn't just plain "it can not work" thing. Just as you did on your forum talking about all the phase difference that matters and not flux strength itself.

Happy to J.
Faraday was wrong when he surmised that a change in flux was what was required for induction in a transformer, and the generation of electricity in a coil. What is really required is a change in the phase of the magnetic B and the H field.
If Faraday was correct, a square wave would not pass through a transformer, but it does. You would also be able to generate electrical power with a switched Flynn PP, but you can't.
I spent months trying to make a MEG work before it dawned on me that something was fishy. I felt like an idiot for taking so long to realize that basic theory wasn't tracking with reality. What a shock.
When the electrical phase between voltage and current is different, a transformer will work. When there is no differential, such as with normal DC, it won't. As I mentioned, DC will pass through a transformer if there is a phase differential, as in a square wave. During the DC portion of the square wave there is no flux change, yet there is induction.
This is something you won't find in any textbook, but that's how it really works. It just so happens that there is usually a change in flux at the same time there is a change in electrical phase, which is where the error occurred. A change in electrical phase also coincides with a change in magnetic phase. I believe this is what is really necessary to induce electrical power into a coil.
Another condition under which the magnetic phase is changed is where there is physical movement, as when a magnetic passes by a coil. If you study this phenomenon you will also find that theory doesn't always track with reality. Magnetic lines of force do not necessarily have to cut across a wire to generate electricity. Just passing a core is enough to induce electrical current into a coil wound around that core, even when it is completely shielded from the passing magnetic field.
A magnetic field has to be either created by an electrical signal whose voltage and current are out of phase, or by another magnetic field which is moving with respect to it, in order to create any electrical power. A magnet passing a coil will induce a stationary magnetic field in the coil. The two fields moving with respect to each other will alter the magnetic phase between the B and the H fields, inducing an electrical current in the coil. As soon as the magnet stops moving, so does the electrical current in the coil.
I discovered these errors in the “Laws” of electrodynamics the hard way. I draw these conclusions from the many experiments I have done with the devices I have built, not from some book.
I would be nice if the great theoretician, Tom Bearden, would mention something on this subject. Having built and patented the MEG, he has undoubtedly come across this major contradiction to Faraday’s law. Nevertheless, he only offers copious quantities of hot air about zero point energy, but not a word about the simple physics involved. Most curious.

Cheers,

Ted

[zhorv324]

Sorry but I don't understand this. In school I learn that change in magnetic flux create electricity in coil. In parallel path device you have flux change in said bars and therefore if you have coil on bar you produce voltage. Another thing is when you wont use electricity off pickup coil you create another magnetic field who is opposite to and you have affection on primary coil (input coil) simple transformer theory. That is reason why this MEG have cop<1.

[Ted Ewert]

Sorry but I don't understand this. In school I learn that change in magnetic flux create electricity in coil. In parallel path device you have flux change in said bars and therefore if you have coil on bar you produce voltage. Another thing is when you wont use electricity off pickup coil you create another magnetic field who is opposite to and you have affection on primary coil (input coil) simple transformer theory. That is reason why this MEG have cop<1.

Why don't you build one, and find out for yourself if what you learned in school is correct. See if your academic theory holds up to reality. I got $100.00 that says it won't work. Easy money if Faraday was right.

Ted

[elias]

Happy to J.
Faraday was wrong when he surmised that a change in flux was what was required for induction in a transformer, and the generation of electricity in a coil. What is really required is a change in the phase of the magnetic B and the H field.
If Faraday was correct, a square wave would not pass through a transformer, but it does. You would also be able to generate electrical power with a switched Flynn PP, but you can't.
I spent months trying to make a MEG work before it dawned on me that something was fishy. I felt like an idiot for taking so long to realize that basic theory wasn't tracking with reality. What a shock.
When the electrical phase between voltage and current is different, a transformer will work. When there is no differential, such as with normal DC, it won't. As I mentioned, DC will pass through a transformer if there is a phase differential, as in a square wave. During the DC portion of the square wave there is no flux change, yet there is induction.
This is something you won't find in any textbook, but that's how it really works. It just so happens that there is usually a change in flux at the same time there is a change in electrical phase, which is where the error occurred. A change in electrical phase also coincides with a change in magnetic phase. I believe this is what is really necessary to induce electrical power into a coil.
Another condition under which the magnetic phase is changed is where there is physical movement, as when a magnetic passes by a coil. If you study this phenomenon you will also find that theory doesn't always track with reality. Magnetic lines of force do not necessarily have to cut across a wire to generate electricity. Just passing a core is enough to induce electrical current into a coil wound around that core, even when it is completely shielded from the passing magnetic field.
A magnetic field has to be either created by an electrical signal whose voltage and current are out of phase, or by another magnetic field which is moving with respect to it, in order to create any electrical power. A magnet passing a coil will induce a stationary magnetic field in the coil. The two fields moving with respect to each other will alter the magnetic phase between the B and the H fields, inducing an electrical current in the coil. As soon as the magnet stops moving, so does the electrical current in the coil.
I discovered these errors in the “Laws” of electrodynamics the hard way. I draw these conclusions from the many experiments I have done with the devices I have built, not from some book.
I would be nice if the great theoretician, Tom Bearden, would mention something on this subject. Having built and patented the MEG, he has undoubtedly come across this major contradiction to Faraday’s law. Nevertheless, he only offers copious quantities of hot air about zero point energy, but not a word about the simple physics involved. Most curious.

Cheers,

Ted

Thanks Ted,

This was certainly informative. I have found some interesting effects in high frequency electrical currents, which seem to resonate with the Aether.

What is interesting that I have observed in my experiments, is that when you move up to the 100KHz range, the current just bites you, and is transferred with only one wire. It's quality changes so much. The amp-meter goes mad, and shows about 10A when only one lead is connected. In short, the output from the transformer, does not make conventional sense any more. I wonder if you have observed anything unusual you would like to share.

Elias

[Inquorate]

What exactly are the b and h fields? I googled but don't think I know enough to get google to give me good links.

This page has some info, but presupposes prior knowledge.

Permanent Magnet Design Guidelines

[zhorv324]

This is my last post about MEG in this thread,and I don't wont to argue with any van.About 2 years ago I started to work on parallel path device with simple static device to prove theory(and that was succeed).After that I put the coil on sade bars off parallel path device and tray several experiment. Final conclusion was the "parallel path MEG" is NOT POSIBLE.Simply words say you cannot eliminate influence off load to input coils.or my input coils always "see" load on pickup coil. MY best result was COP=0,85. That is reason way I decide to build parallel path motor and put MEG away! In parallel path motor drive coil cant see the mechanical load and therefore current remain same in wild range off RPM.I must say , in my motor COP is <1, and reson may be diferent(bad building, big air gap ,mechanical lose , saturation off core , bad coil , controler and cet.).But I still tray and sam day I maybe sucside. In that time I learn many thing about motor ,magnetic flux, electronics(controlers)and that only important.I still be on this tread and maybe help Jetijs with motor

[Ted Ewert]

What exactly are the b and h fields? I googled but don't think I know enough to get google to give me good links.

This page has some info, but presupposes prior knowledge.

Permanent Magnet Design Guidelines

The B and H fields roughly correspond to current and voltage in electrical terms. One is pressure and the other is current flow. I don't remember which is which because I don't think in those terms, and it doesn't matter. I use them because they are the common parlance.
This subject is vital to an understanding of how energy is generated electromechanically. I'm starting to think this part is left out of the textbooks on purpose. The reason I say this is because if anyone figures out how to alter the phase of the magnetic pressure and the current in a generating device, without movement, they'll have free electrical energy forever. Somebody needs to find the magnetic equivalent of an inductor. Then the MEG would work.

Ted

BTW, the Bearden version of the MEG is a red herring. We all need to wonder why.

[nilrehob]

What exactly are the b and h fields? I googled but don't think I know enough to get google to give me good links.

This page has some info, but presupposes prior knowledge.

Permanent Magnet Design Guidelines

This page explains it:
Magnetic field - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

/Hob

[erfinder]

Somebody needs to find the magnetic equivalent of an inductor.

Ted

Whoa.....That got my wheels turning........hook me up if you find it before I do.......

edit....

Which inductor characteristics are you referring to? I am thinking that there are already several materials which fit the bill if we are simply referencing the inductors charge/discharge characteristic.....

Regards

[DrMabuzo]

What can I say, after following your work in the Electric Motor Secrets thread, I expected this. Excellent!!

Two questions:
1.Is this the circuit you have used but without recovery?

2.Did you measure the mechanical output?

Regards,
Nenad

Hi everyone,

I am new here and I am very impressed with the way you made the engine and how you resented it.

Where do you find this schematic?

thanks a lot