Well said Luc
Check out post 389
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/16584-analysis-witts-generator-13.html
It ain't over yet.

WOW, more than a page of bashing the QEG team (Jamie, Val & Hope)

Do you feel better now?...  love and joy for your follows?


The QEG team may not have a working alternative energy solution for the needy of the world at this time or ever...  but, I feel they are genuinely trying to help change the pathetic state the world has reached with the general mindset our educatedly certified have reached that there is nothing else then the science they've learned. This is well demonstrated in this topic.

Why not use knowledge and time to think of something that hasn't been tried and post your suggestion or ideas.
If you can't come up with something,  then why would you criticize those who try?...  seriously, give this some thought to see how it helps.

The day we work together will be the day of change.

I will not debate this nor should anyone who understands.

Just sharing

Luc

I for one would not have a problem with these guys if they had not lied about what they had and used those lies to raise money.  I do not see any evidence that they have added to our knowledge of anything that is going to help with either energy or pollution.

I think that it is perfectly fine to have an unusual idea.  There are people who are willing to fund very high risk ideas.  Those investors be they deep pockets or someone giving to an Indiegogo campaign deserve to be told what the inventor has actually realized and what the inventor only hopes they can eventually do. 

I spend a lot of my time working on improving our energy and pollution situation.  Neither I nor anyone I work with pitch investors based on claims of results that we haven't realized.  There is so much good monetizeable work to do that there are plenty of investors around willing to fund legitimate efforts.

Why not use knowledge and time to think of something that hasn't been tried and post your suggestion or ideas.
If you can't come up with something,  then why would you criticize those who try?...  seriously, give this some thought to see how it helps.

The day we work together will be the day of change.

Hi Luc
I fully agree with you, working together will be the way of change from a global 'virtual hobbyist' to a 'virtual prof'.
However we need both the 'critics' and the 'creatives' in a winning team. The purpose of a 'peer review' in regular science is just to have a critical reviewer which weeds out the errors made, before something is being published.
Creative minds tent to develop a tunnel vision while working on an interesting development and sometimes do not see that they are missing something. Discussions between the 'creatives' and 'critics' very often end in ego driven arguments. Sometimes someone gets banned from a discussion for being critical.

'critics' and 'creatives' are like yin and yang; north and south; plus and minus.....etc
Best regards,
Ben

I am going to enter rarely visited waters...
The example circuit to analyze the problem is trivial - it's just an ideal inductor shorted by an ideal wire.

The formula for your inductance as a function of time:
L(t) =  (sin(omega * t) +2)     [inductance varies between 1 and 3 Henries]   Note - I am avoiding a divide-by-zero problem

Let's define the initial conditions and use something simple to illustrate the problem:  When the inductance is 3 Henries, say the current is 5 amps.   That means you have 37.5 joules stored in the coil under these conditions.

Everything is ideal, so no energy is lost.   We just need to solve for the current as a function of inductance.  Since the inductance also varies with time, you effectively are also solving for the current as a function of time.   The voltage across the coil is always zero, and that may help us to simplify things.

Let's take a peek at how things look when the inductance is 1 henry.  You still have to have 37.5 joules stored in the inductor therefore the current has to be:

E = 1/2 L I^2
I^2 = 2E/L
I = sqrt(2E/L)
Therefore when L = 1 Henry,  i = 8.66 amps.

Now let's complicate it slightly.
In your example above the cause of the inductance change was not given.  It was just abstractly assumed to happen somehow.
In the following exercise, I will attempt to give it a real cause.

Let's propose that the change in inductance is caused by an ideal ferrite core at rest being attracted into that ideal air coil from far away, in absence of gravity, so that its inductance changes from 1H (when the core is away) to 3H (when the core is inside the coil).  See the graph below for a realistic relationship between the core's distance and the inductance of the coil (taken from a real linear motor).
According to your calculations when the core is away the current flowing through the coil is 8.66A and when the core is inside the coil the current flowing in it is 5A. ...Fine.

Let's assume that the acceleration of the core into the coil from 10cm away takes 100ms and when the core reaches the middle of the coil its speed is 1m/s.
10µs before the core reaches the middle of the coil, a switch is opened and all of the energy stored in the coil (37.5J) is discharged into an ideal capacitor in 10µs.  Now all of the energy is in the capacitor and no current flows through the coil. At this point the capacitor is disconnected from the coil (so it cannot recharge the coil back) and the massive core continues on its path with constant velocity because now the coil is opened and has no current flowing in it, thus it cannot exert any force on the departing core.

But wait!  Now, we have all of our input energy recovered in a capacitor but the departing core has significant remaining kinetic energy 

One of the things that I think could help is a basic power analyzer that is affordable and reasonably accurate:  Say +/-5%.  I think that is a doable project that could be done open source so that for less than $200. and perhaps as little as $100. people working with electrical machines could quickly assess actual input and output power precisely enough to know if they have something with real promise, or are just misleading themselves with poor power measurements.

Something like this?

WOW, more than a page of bashing the QEG team (Jamie, Val & Hope)

Do you feel better now?...  love and joy for your follows?


The QEG team may not have a working alternative energy solution for the needy of the world at this time or ever...  but, I feel they are genuinely trying to help change the pathetic state the world has reached with the general mindset our educatedly certified have reached that there is nothing else then the science they've learned. This is well demonstrated in this topic.

Why not use knowledge and time to think of something that hasn't been tried and post your suggestion or ideas.
If you can't come up with something,  then why would you criticize those who try?...  seriously, give this some thought to see how it helps.

The day we work together will be the day of change.

I will not debate this nor should anyone who understands.

Just sharing

Luc

Luc,

It's ironic if you state that you want to share and in the previous line you state that you will not debate.

The appraisal of what is transpiring with the QEG is negative based on the evidence as myself and others see it.  That is NOT bashing.  It's only looked upon as bashing if you don't want to confront the issues.  You are well aware how many free energy enthusiasts find it incredibly difficult to express something negative about someone's free energy proposition.  That's like being in a straight jacket.

Sometimes you have to decide between right and wrong and if you are going to speak up.  I once went to a health club in a building where there was an entrance on the first floor, a food court on the second floor, and the health club was on the fifth floor.  There was an elevator serving all the floors, and an escalator between the first floor and the second floor.  The food court was not getting enough business and they reprogrammed the elevator so when you went down, you could not stop on the first floor.  The elevator only stopped on the second floor to force you to pass by the food court.

I spoke to the girl behind the health club counter and told her to follow up with the building manager because the elevator might be a way out of the building if there was a fire on the second floor and other ways were blocked.  She refused.  During 9/11, the building manager in the second tower told everybody to remain at their desks after the first tower was hit.  In the recent Korean ferry disaster, the idiot on the PA system told everybody not to move while the ferry was listing and sinking.  You have to have the f*cking guts to say what is right sometimes, and DO what you believe is right, and not tow the "company line" if it doesn't make sense.  Some stupid asshole told people not to move on the ferry and now 236 people are dead.  Everyone in that chain of command should be sentenced to 25 years in prison.

So I don't believe that the QEG team is trying to make the world a better place and I refuse to put on rose-coloured glasses.  I don't believe that they are genuine.  I would never design and build something that does not work and claim that it works, period.  The QEG story has holes in it like a Swiss cheese and they have NO CREDIBLE DATA to prove what they are claiming.  The credible data so far is showing so far that they DO NO HAVE what they are claiming.

If you want to play with a new circuit, go ahead and play.  But that doesn't mean that myself and others can't express our honest opinions about the real QEG team and their proposition.  Money and even lives can be on the line sometimes.

MileHigh

Captain Zero:

The problem is that your rebuttal stops after the "holes."  You have nothing to say past that point.

Read this and weep:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois_Theatre_fire

MileHigh

P.S.:  Quoting Captain Zero:

I didn't mean for you to look in the hole in your head...silly goose.

Taken from Repartee for Dummies, second edition.