CHARLES FLYNN Free Energy Generator

[Ted Ewert]

Quite frankly I'm well respected by persons that matter most and I could care less whether you respect me or not. But just to shut you up, here is an example of my work:
AEI Intelligent Technologies AEI-CP1200TX CompactPCI cPCI Dual 2 Port Gigabit Ethernet NIC Adapter

I did the entire design, multilevel board layout, prototype builds and all the rest of the hands on work required to bring that product to market. I have my company logo embedded in the power planes of those boards so you can hold it up to the light and see that it is my design. You'll note that it is a Compact PCI chassis design which conforms to IEEE standards. Not only is my work respected, but the product commands a good price even on today's market years later. Call the company and see what the price is for working product that is derived from my years of work and knowledge.

Heck, if you can build a big old gnarly ethernet adapter up to IEEE standards with your company logo on the side, a little project like the Flynn device, or the MEG for that matter, should be a walk in the park.
I certainly see now why you appear so confident in your own infallibility since an ethernet adapter and a MEG are virtual brother and sister in the electrical world.

[Michelinho]

Charles Flynn energy generator.

Hi all,

On my first attempt to replicate this generator, I got it to self oscillate and the output on the AWG 16 was close to 1.8VDC. The laminated core cross section was 1" X 1" and I use a D2041Darlington transistor, sorry I don't recall the cap or checked the resonating frequency with a scope. I also used my frequency generator to find the max output and found a ~6.5 KHz to give the max output of 2.1VDC with that core.

My next attempt will use a 3/4" X 2" laminated core cross section with the same cylindrical magnets 1/2" X 2". I will also use magnet wire for the output coil giving me more turns per inches than the AWG 16 speaker wire used. I hope for better results. It is mostly done, just to make the coils winder jigs and filling them with magnet wire when health permits.

I can say that Ted's input were useful and Harvey theoretical explanations were a great help in the later design. Also it was the material that I had here. We are here all for the same thing, find the missing link and all your thoughts and knowledge is fully appreciated. Let's get back to cracking this.

"Think positive" as Elvis Graton would say.

Take care all,

Michel

[Harvey]

Heck, if you can build a big old gnarly ethernet adapter up to IEEE standards with your company logo on the side, a little project like the Flynn device, or the MEG for that matter, should be a walk in the park.
I certainly see now why you appear so confident in your own infallibility since an ethernet adapter and a MEG are virtual brother and sister in the electrical world.

Hi Ted, you have a serious problem here. This is a social environment.

You think this thread is about me and my abilities but it isn't. Even though I have the abilities, materials and equipment to build this device, what I do with my time is my business, not yours. You really should stop attacking me and stick to the issues. The reasons you give for why you think this device does not work, "at all" as you put it, simply do not hold up under investigation. So you have purposely come into the thread to lead people away from trying to experiment with this - why?

This thread is about the Flynn device and whether or not anyone is willing to build it and more directly whether they have built it according to the specific and precise plans shown on the you-tube link provided. As Doc says, "it has already served its purpose" and shows quite distinctly that the device has not been replicated by anyone here willing to post thus far - including you. EDIT: Sorry Mechelinho, we had cross posted and you are the first post I've seen here that has built the self-oscillator so there are some experimenting with this willing to share their results - I withdraw that previous statement

My involvement in this thread has been to stress the pitfalls associated with experimenting with this Patented Technology as a courtesy to those experimenters interested in building and testing the device. If a person knows going in what to expect, then they are better prepared to succeed. I have shared what I know to be true for the common good of those involved - including you. But instead of seeing the positive reasons for my posts you turn them into something they are not.

If you pay careful attention to this post here, you will see that it is meant to help you. I certainly hope you take it in the kind spirit in which it is intended.

[Ted Ewert]

Hi Ted, you have a serious problem here. This is a social environment.

I don't have any problems here. You're the one who's complaining.

You think this thread is about me and my abilities but it isn't. Even though I have the abilities, materials and equipment to build this device, what I do with my time is my business, not yours. You really should stop attacking me and stick to the issues. The reasons you give for why you think this device does not work, "at all" as you put it, simply do not hold up under investigation. So you have purposely come into the thread to lead people away from trying to experiment with this - why?

I'm not telling anyone what to do. I'm just saying that this device doesn't work as one would think. Unlike you, I have extensively tested quite a number of these types of devices and found none of them to work. I am not alone in this either. Many other experimenters have found the same thing as I have. You, on the other hand, pretend to know all about it when in reality you don't know anything about it. All you can do is regurgitate textbook theory that I am already quite familiar with.
Don't you realize that you haven't told me anything I don't already know? You don't pay attention to the information I post and instead start spouting off about all kinds of irrelevant stuff you think is vitally important. You don't know what you're talking about because you don't understand this device!

As Doc says, "it has already served its purpose" and shows quite distinctly that the device has not been replicated by anyone here willing to post thus far - including you.

Wrong again, I have indeed replicated the Flynn device and I'm posting that it doesn't work.

My involvement in this thread has been to stress the pitfalls associated with experimenting with this Patented Technology as a courtesy to those experimenters interested in building and testing the device.

How in the world would you know the pitfalls or the device if you've never built one?? You don't know anything about it yet you act like you're some kind of authority. On the other hand, I know quite a bit about the device because I've built and tested a bunch of them. Yet you tell me I'm full of it and don't know what I'm doing because my results don't agree with some simulator or academic theory you have. That's about as hypocritical as it gets.

If a person knows going in what to expect, then they are better prepared to succeed. I have shared what I know to be true for the common good of those involved - including you. But instead of seeing the positive reasons for my posts you turn them into something they are not.
If you pay careful attention to this post here, you will see that it is meant to help you. I certainly hope you take it in the kind spirit in which it is intended.

We all share what we know here and try and help each other out. There's nothing wrong with that.
It's your condescending attitude and lack of respect for those with a different opinion that annoys me.
Having an alternate opinion isn't the problem either. Not willing to back it up is. You immediately put yourself in the category of armchair engineer, who are a dime a dozen around here.
This is a site for alternative ideas and concepts to create abundant, clean energy. All you have to offer is textbook electronics, which is fine for designing circuits and you've helped a lot of guys that way.
The thing is, I already know textbook electronics and physics and don't need your help with any of it. You haven't told me anything I don't already know.
Most of us here are trying to figure out what the textbooks don't tell us. That's what this forum is about. That's what the Flynn device is about.
You might be happier in a more traditional forum where they build stuff like remote controlled model cars and robots.

Ted

[Harvey]

Ted,
I must say, you most certainly are a brilliant master of inductive reasoning. It is absolutely amazing how you were able to determine that I never build anything

I wish you the best in your quest.

[Ted Ewert]

Ted,
I must say, you most certainly are a brilliant master of inductive reasoning. It is absolutely amazing how you were able to determine that I never build anything

I wish you the best in your quest.

Where'd I say that? I just wanted you to build the Flynn device so you could see for yourself how it works. It's an anomalous device that displays a contradictory reaction to some very fundamental and commonly held beliefs.
We all suffer from cognitive dissonance when we see things that don't fit our dearly cherished world view. It took me months (due to an unusually thick skull) to finally figure out something very fishy was going on with the MEG. I couldn't believe something as basic as Faraday's law could be incorrect. But it was, and that opened my eyes.
That's why I was trying to goad you into building a replication. Then you would tear your hair out trying everything you could think of to make it work, and it still wouldn't produce 1 watt of extra energy. You'd be left wondering what in the heck is going on, and being a smart guy, you'd figure it out.
I apologize if I was offensive or insulting, and I would also like to wish you the very best.

Cheers,

Ted

[Michelinho]

Hi all,

A picture of the first replication and one of the newer test model with the bigger core which is almost twice as big as the first one.

Take care all,

Michel

P.S.: When one of my replication doesn't work as predicted, it is because my understanding of the device is lacking or the material (or the activating circuit) I use does not match what the inventor used.

[SkyWatcher]

Hi folks, Hi Ted, maybe im making the incorrect conclusion here, however if these things you have said based on experiments are true, then a linear drive magnet motor would have no counter emf when repulsing the magnets away from a core like you have described and would be very efficient similar to what the attraction motor accomplishes that Peter L's. electric motor secret thread is based on. I wonder if air-core would be similar in effect. The question is, even though the secondary is showing the same power with or without the magnets, isn't counter emf induced from the permanent magnet on repulsion traditionally supposed to be subtracting from your input, thus should show a reduction in secondary output when magnets are in place repelling away. But from what your saying based on observation, that this is not the case. If you could help make this more clear, i would be greatly thankful. Here are a few of your quotes, Ted.

The power into the secondary winding was identical with or without the magnets.
It also shows that even though a magnet is moving with respect to the core, no induction will take place until that magnet moves at some angle across the core.
The magnet will not induce any current into a coil if it travels straight at it
It has to move by at 90 degrees to the axis of the coil.
I did two tests; one with the magnets being repelled and one with no magnets included. In both tests the only power induced into the secondary winding was from the power pulse. There was no difference in the waveform, voltage or current levels in either test. Therefore I concluded that the magnets produced no discernible electrical effects in this configuration.

peace love light
Tyson

[Ted Ewert]

Hi folks, Hi Ted, maybe im making the incorrect conclusion here, however if these things you have said based on experiments are true, then a linear drive magnet motor would have no counter emf when repulsing the magnets away from a core like you have described and would be very efficient similar to what the attraction motor accomplishes that Peter L's. electric motor secret thread is based on. I wonder if air-core would be similar in effect. The question is, even though the secondary is showing the same power with or without the magnets, isn't counter emf induced from the permanent magnet on repulsion traditionally supposed to be subtracting from your input, thus should show a reduction in secondary output when magnets are in place repelling away. But from what your saying based on observation, that this is not the case. If you could help make this more clear, i would be greatly thankful. Here are a few of your quotes, Ted.

peace love light
Tyson

Hi Tyson, Good observations and good questions! You're right, there is no CEMF unless an open magnet goes within the coil as in a solenoid. The axis of the coil is the strongest angle of pull for the magnet, but also the most difficult mechanically. The problem is that once the magnet is pulled into the core, it needs to be pulled away(even if there is no residual attraction). This may sound simple but it presents some rather major headaches.
I just went through designing and building a similar linear motor. I got very high efficiencies, high torque and low power draw. The problem is one of expense. You have to build many large stators in order to get enough torque to effectively cover 360 degrees of rotation. It works very well for what it does, but is economically impractical.
To answer your question; the mechanical repulsion of the magnets take place by virtue of the field produced by the coil. This field is unaffected by the magnets since the magnets induce no EMF whatsoever. The coil draws the exact same amount of power with or without the magnets, and the secondary also draws the same amount of power (this is largely due to the high inductance of the coil). The waveform on the scope doesn't change at all under either condition. No extra spikes or blips.
If Faraday's law was correct, the change in polarity and consequent flux density increase caused by the magnets across the coil core should induce some sort of EMF in the secondary. However, this is not the case.
Now, if that same magnet gets pushed off axis (say, if it were on a pendulum), and it's approach towards the core is at an angle, then there will be induction.
I wish I had a better understanding of exactly why this works the way it does. My best guess is that the B and H field have to be out of phase in order for electrical inductance to take place. The part I'm a little fuzzy on is exactly how mechanical motion cases a phase differential in the fields. Interesting stuff!

Cheers,

Ted

[Doc]

Ted, did your design have double the weight of copper windings on the one side vs the other.

[Ted Ewert]

Ted, did your design have double the weight of copper windings on the one side vs the other.

Which device are you referring to?

[Doc]

Sorry, the replication of the Flynn device. Apparently one of the key features is the that the ends L1 & L3 use the same gauge copper wire, but one end has to be double the weight of the other. Also the wire in L2 has to be thicker.

[Ted Ewert]

Sorry, the replication of the Flynn device. Apparently one of the key features is the that the ends L1 & L3 use the same gauge copper wire, but one end has to be double the weight of the other. Also the wire in L2 has to be thicker.

I made my own version, and no, it was not to those specs. However, I don't see how making one side bigger than the other makes any difference. The whole point of the device is to switch the flux from a permanent magnet through a coil core in order to induce electricity into the coil. My whole point is that under those conditions PM flux will not induce anything into a coil, no matter what size it is. The MEG is essentially the same device.
I don't want to discourage anyone who doubts what I'm saying from replicating the device. Replicate it by all means. I'll be tickled pink if someone actually gets it to work. That would mean the end of all our energy worries.

Ted

[morpher44]

PHI ratio frequencies

I found this thread after viewing someone's video about Charles Flynn's approach.

I wanted to pass on an insight that may add more degrees of freedom to an invention like Charles Flynn's magnet coil thingy. I am struck by how similar it is to Hendershot's solenoid - bar - horseshoe magnet device, which also is making flux go left and then right.

Recently I've been looking at the Hubbard Coil and I think I've had an epiphany that may encourage more experimentation with devices like this.
The idea is so simple and brilliant, I can't believe I didn't notice it before.

Hubbard used a PHI ratio for the diameter of his coils. This has bothered me for years. I made some coils and noticed the self-resonance for the big versus small coils is also a PHI ratio. In other words, Hubbard did this specifically to create that FREQUENCY ratio.

Why? If you beat one frequency with another, you get a 3rd waveform. That waveform can be quite ugly or can be sinusoidal as well. Only PHI ratio frequency can PERFECTLY mix to produce a lower frequency that is also a PHI ratio. Mixing it with the next frequency up produces yet another frequency lower that is a PHI ratio lower, etc. etc.

Hence, in addition to just worry about FLUX being moved with low power to create fields that can be used for power generation, WHY NOT also exploit resonance and harmonics too?

I have a recent video under the "Hubbard Coil" thread. If PHI ratio frequencies are important for these devices to "work better", then this might be of value to some of you experimenters.

In the Flynn device, for example, you could have TWO coil inputs. One that oscillates the system at frequency A (a nice resonant frequency found for your system). You could have another input coil that resonates at frequency
A / 1.618
Call this frequency B. The BEAT frequency produce by frequency A and B mixing in the system, would produce frequency C, which is
A / (1.618)^2

But, there also should be lots of harmonics at various multiples of PHI produces.

In a nut shell, resonance and harmonics can be exploited using PHI, which is an OPTIMUM solution. Also, thinking about what occurs with the magnetic fields in the IRON (or equiv), the spins can also be PHI ratios if you have CORES that have a geometry that produces resonances in the material with this ratio.

There are many boxes to think outside of....and like a team working for Edison, we need to be trying EVERYTHING we can imaging until something glows.

[ewizard]

I agree that Phi ratio and related Sacred Geometry very likely plays into some devices that have achieved overunity.