Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

problem with the MEG as described in the patent

Expand Messages
  • Norm Fletcher
    Those of us who have built a MEG know the basic circuitry is simple enough to impliment. Obtaining the Metglas core is also just a matter of the proper email
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 5, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Those of us who have built a MEG know the basic circuitry is simple
      enough to impliment. Obtaining the Metglas core is also just a matter
      of the proper email or phone call plus money. However, there is a flaw
      in the patent design which only stands out after a thorough study of
      the effect that the MEG attempts to exploit-The Aharanov-Bohm effect.
      This effect covers several areas of physics to include magnetics. An
      understanding of the AB magnetic effect is essential to the proper
      building of a device like the MEG. If we carefully study the AB
      effect, we will come to the conclusion that a traditional build of the
      MEG, using typical transformer technology, will yield a transformer
      and not an over-unity device. Here's the bottom line: if the control
      coils create flux which travels outside the core, the device becomes a
      transformer. In fact, that's why the Metglas core was used in the
      first place! It is so permeable to flux that the inventors hoped that
      the control coils flux would stay inside the core. Anthony Craddock
      (Bearden's website guy and an engineer) told me that successful MEG
      configurations were very carefully wound. However, careful winding and
      attention to material is not what the MEG needs. What the MEG needs,
      instead of control coils, are areas of the core which have variable
      permeability controllable with the same basic circuitry. The control
      coils are meant to change permeablity, but introduction of flux into
      the space around the core makes the MEG just a magnetically biased
      transformer. If some of us come up with a core which has control
      areas-that leak no flux into the space around the core, we won't even
      need Metglas any longer.
      Let's stick together and come up with the solution!

      Norm
    • Brent Selleck
      Well said... the proper meg resembles a well tuned antenna more than anything else I ve seen... keeping the flux where it belongs is essential... both in the
      Message 2 of 8 , Mar 5, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Well said...
        the proper meg resembles a well tuned antenna more than anything else I've
        seen...
        keeping the flux where it belongs is essential...
        both in the primary windings and in the core so the secondaries aren't
        contaminated, thereby inhibiting their ability to be energized by the flux
        pulsations
        everything Mr. Bearden has stated in the way of clarification has stated
        this over and over... that's why he believes the meg needs a year of
        labratory calibration studies...
        to map the event horizons that represent the the transfer of power from
        where the energy orginates (getting his book and READING it would help you
        all understand this) into our dimension as exhibited by the overunity in the
        secondaries when everything is tuned up properly....

        It's a classic example of an emerging technology... after all, the first
        radio transmitters were nothing but two wires rubbed together to
        spark!!!!!!!!
        Only later, after much, much calibration of material combinations (Edison,
        3,000 filament attempts) did we arrive at combinations that were efficeint
        in the extreme...

        Brent Selleck


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Norm Fletcher" <fletchmo47@...>
        To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 3:19 PM
        Subject: [MEG_builders] problem with the MEG as described in the patent


        > Those of us who have built a MEG know the basic circuitry is simple
        > enough to impliment. Obtaining the Metglas core is also just a matter
        > of the proper email or phone call plus money. However, there is a flaw
        > in the patent design which only stands out after a thorough study of
        > the effect that the MEG attempts to exploit-The Aharanov-Bohm effect.
        > This effect covers several areas of physics to include magnetics. An
        > understanding of the AB magnetic effect is essential to the proper
        > building of a device like the MEG. If we carefully study the AB
        > effect, we will come to the conclusion that a traditional build of the
        > MEG, using typical transformer technology, will yield a transformer
        > and not an over-unity device. Here's the bottom line: if the control
        > coils create flux which travels outside the core, the device becomes a
        > transformer. In fact, that's why the Metglas core was used in the
        > first place! It is so permeable to flux that the inventors hoped that
        > the control coils flux would stay inside the core. Anthony Craddock
        > (Bearden's website guy and an engineer) told me that successful MEG
        > configurations were very carefully wound. However, careful winding and
        > attention to material is not what the MEG needs. What the MEG needs,
        > instead of control coils, are areas of the core which have variable
        > permeability controllable with the same basic circuitry. The control
        > coils are meant to change permeablity, but introduction of flux into
        > the space around the core makes the MEG just a magnetically biased
        > transformer. If some of us come up with a core which has control
        > areas-that leak no flux into the space around the core, we won't even
        > need Metglas any longer.
        > Let's stick together and come up with the solution!
        >
        > Norm
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Main page:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEG_builders
        >
        >
        > To post a message to this group, send email to
        > MEG_Builders@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > To contact the moderator of this group, send email to
        > MEG_Builders-owner@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
        > MEG_Builders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Wayne Robey
        ... It seems to me that the control winding that would most closely achieve this is a single layer as close to the core as possible. On the other hand, I am
        Message 3 of 8 , Mar 27, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          > "Norm Fletcher" <fletchmo47@...> wrote:
          > ...
          > Here's the bottom line: if the control
          > coils create flux which travels outside the core, the device becomes a
          > transformer. In fact, that's why the Metglas core was used in the
          > first place! It is so permeable to flux that the inventors hoped that
          > the control coils flux would stay inside the core. Anthony Craddock
          > (Bearden's website guy and an engineer) told me that successful MEG
          > configurations were very carefully wound... If some of us come up with
          > a core which has control areas-that leak no flux into the space around
          > the core, we won't even need Metglas any longer.

          It seems to me that the control winding that would most closely achieve this
          is a single layer as close to the core as possible. On the other hand, I am
          not convinced that this has anything to do with it. In support om my doubt, I
          mention 2 things. First the Metglas is only efficient (low hysteresis loss)
          at low (power line) frequencies, yet the MEG is traditionally operated at a
          much higher frequency. jnaudin posted his best results when he was using a TV fly back core and not a thin (approaching single layer) control winding. He claims that his conditioned resistor or other suitable non linear load is essential. I am led to wonder if there are 2 different things going on here.


          --
          _______________________________________________

          Search for businesses by name, location, or phone number. -Lycos Yellow Pages

          http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10
        • Norm Fletcher
          ... First the Metglas is only efficient (low hysteresis loss) ... operated at a ... using a TV fly back core and not a thin (approaching single layer) control
          Message 4 of 8 , Mar 28, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "Wayne Robey" <robeyw@...> wrote:
            First the Metglas is only efficient (low hysteresis loss)
            > at low (power line) frequencies, yet the MEG is traditionally
            operated at a
            > much higher frequency. jnaudin posted his best results when he was
            using a TV fly back core and not a thin (approaching single layer)
            control winding. He claims that his conditioned resistor or other
            suitable non linear load is essential. I am led to wonder if there are
            2 different things going on here.
            >

            The Powerlite C core that is used in the MEG has a loss of between
            15mW to 500 mW/ cubic cM depending on the flux density at 20kHz.
            http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_1_6_2_2.htm
            Not bad for the traditional MEG frequency (45kHz oscillator, one pulse
            for each half cycle out= about 22.5kHz operating frequency) 20 Khz is
            traditional also for the operation of a typical pwm inverter or switch
            mode power supply. I believe you are absolutely right in wondering if
            there are 2 different things going on.

            Try thinking only of increasing the permeablity of a section of the
            MEG core at the place where the input coils are on the present model.
            We would need to be able to do this with similar input circuitry.
            Suppose we could do this with no external flux being generated in the
            system. We would then be dealing only with the flux of the magnet. It
            would shuttle to the opposite side of the MEG and our well explained
            theory would be reality. There would be no need for specially
            conditioned resistors, or of not-so-convincing oscilloscope power
            analysis. The only power out would be from the shuttled flux of the
            magnet. And the faster we could shuttle the flux, the greater the
            output power would be.

            So, back to this writer's initial thesis: I believe he MEG WILL work
            if we can use metalurgy or some other exotic property of materials
            magic to change the permeability of the core without introducting
            external flux. I really believe it goes beyond a close winding or
            other traditional transformer building technique. It strikes me also
            that frequency tuning would be unnecessary using this yet-to-be
            discovered technique. Well, I can dream, can't I?

            Best to everybody-except you bastards in the oil industry--
            Fletchmo
          • Dave
            Hi guys I agree with the idea that driving a coil to impede the flux path is a difficult task. I have worked with dc brushless motors and the motor stator
            Message 5 of 8 , Aug 22, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi guys
              I agree with the idea that driving a coil to impede the flux path is a
              difficult task. I have worked with dc brushless motors and the motor
              stator permeability is a problem for high torque with small motors.
              As I see it the objective of the meg is not to totally stop the flux
              path but to reduce it just prior to reaching core saturation. Any
              change in flux will result in a change in secondary output.
              I do believe that true over unity can be achieved with the new
              materials being invented with a crystalline structure that could shift
              polarity and hinder a flux path with a small current applied.

              Dave
            • leskraut
              ***** PREFACE BY GROUP MODERATOR ******* I am approving this posting with some trepidation that it might spur a round of THEORY discussion. What s the problem
              Message 6 of 8 , Sep 5 6:26 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                ***** PREFACE BY GROUP MODERATOR *******

                I am approving this posting with some trepidation that it might spur a round of THEORY discussion. What's the problem with that? Simple. This site is about BUILDING MEG type devices and discussing the results of experiments with them NOT ABOUT DISCUSSING THEORY. Since Leskraut is a new member, I'm making an exception for this posting.

                Regards,
                Stan Mayer Co-moderator for MEG_ Builders.

                P.S. Just FYI ... having been a MEG Builder and moderator for this site for many many years and having watched it fail to fulfill its purpose of being a place for people to share the results of their experiments, I AM VERY VERY CLOSE TO SHUTTING THE SITE DOWN.

                May I suggest to those of you who have recently done some MEG experimenting that you report your results now, placing your photos and drawings in the PHOTOS section of this site.

                *********************************************************

                Thank you for letting me join in as a new member.
                I am still reviewing the material posted and have learned a great deal. I have a lot to read yet. But I ran into this comment and wondered if this relates to certain changes I have noticed in the MEG design. Even though Dave made this comment some time ago it certainly seems to have made a mark.

                In this picture there are three visible white square rods top, right and left.
                Any Ideas what they are? and perhaps the purpose?
                http://www.cheniere.org/images/meg/AUT_57061a1.jpg

                On this one there are now cross flux magnetic gates.
                http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg4cf.htm

                I am wondering if the material used for these flux magnetic gates is available to attempt this replication?

                Thanks
                Les


                --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "Dave" <dv_fixit@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hi guys
                > I agree with the idea that driving a coil to impede the flux path is a
                > difficult task. I have worked with dc brushless motors and the motor
                > stator permeability is a problem for high torque with small motors.
                > As I see it the objective of the meg is not to totally stop the flux
                > path but to reduce it just prior to reaching core saturation. Any
                > change in flux will result in a change in secondary output.
                > I do believe that true over unity can be achieved with the new
                > materials being invented with a crystalline structure that could shift
                > polarity and hinder a flux path with a small current applied.
                >
                > Dave
                >
              • mayerstan
                ... LES, MY REPLIES ARE EMBEDDED IN ALL CAP TEXT WITHIN YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE BELOW. STAN MAYER ... PLEASE ELABORATE ON CERTAIN CHANGES AS I HAVE SEEN
                Message 7 of 8 , Sep 10 1:10 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com, "leskraut" <leskraut@...> wrote:
                  LES,
                  MY REPLIES ARE EMBEDDED IN ALL CAP TEXT WITHIN YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE BELOW.

                  STAN MAYER
                  <snip>

                  > Thank you for letting me join in as a new member.
                  > I am still reviewing the material posted and have learned a great deal. I have a lot to read yet. But I ran into this comment and wondered if this relates to certain changes I have noticed in the MEG design.

                  PLEASE ELABORATE ON "CERTAIN CHANGES" AS I HAVE SEEN NO MAJOR CHANGES IN BEARDEN'S MEG.

                  Even though Dave made this comment some time ago it certainly seems to have made a mark.

                  HMMMMMMMM.

                  > In this picture there are three visible white square rods top, right and left.
                  > Any Ideas what they are? and perhaps the purpose?

                  MY GUESS IS THAT THEY ARE BRACES/SUPPPORTS/SHIMS WITH THE SIDE ONES BEING USED TO HOLD THE TWO CEES OF THE CORE TOGETHER.

                  > http://www.cheniere.org/images/meg/AUT_57061a1.jpg
                  >
                  > On this one there are now cross flux magnetic gates.
                  > http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg4cf.htm
                  >
                  > I am wondering if the material used for these flux magnetic gates is available to attempt this replication?

                  I DON'T RECALL THE NAUDIN EVER BUILT THE FLUX GATE VERSION OF THE MEG SHOWN IN JNAUDIN.FREE.FR/MEG/MEG4CF.HTM. I BELIEVE THAT THE PICTURE IS BUT A CONCEPT DRAWING BY NAUDIN. ASSUMING THAT NAUDIN NEVER BUILT SUCH A MEG, WELL THEN WE WOULD HAVE NO EASY WAY OF KNOWING WHAT MATERIAL NAUDIN HAD IN MIND. BY THE WAY, NAUDIN IS A MEMBER OF THIS GROUP AND SO HOPEFULLY IF HE BUILT THIS MEG AND/OR HAD SOME SPECIAL MATERIAL IN MIND FOR THE FLUX GATES, HOPEFULLY HE'LL REPLY TO THIS POSTING TO TELL US THE ANSWERS.

                  BEST REGARDS,

                  STAN MAYER
                  >
                  > Thanks
                  > Les
                  <SNIP>
                • Norman
                  I haven t posted in a long time because not much has happened with my AMCC1000 core. After meeting Don Smith in 2007, it became a possibility that operation of
                  Message 8 of 8 , Dec 20, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I haven't posted in a long time because not much has happened with my AMCC1000 core. After meeting Don Smith in 2007, it became a possibility that operation of the MEG may very well be a resonance thing. The combination of coil, capacitor and the Metglas core could have a unique frequency that brings about an over unity condition. I noticed that the shape of the output waveform changes with the input frequency, but I never looked at the in/out ratio using various frequencies--I just used the frequency called for in the patent.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.