Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments  (Read 4712 times)

TommeyReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« on: March 02, 2023, 08:44:23 AM »
Hi All,

This is something I'm looking into:

The motionless electromagnetic generator (MEG) was built by Tom Bearden. Allegedly, the device can eventually sustain its operation in addition to powering a load without application of external electrical power. ... Bearden, Tom, "Perpetual motion vs. "working machines creating energy from nothing"".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moedDfD43Q8

Tom.

TommeyReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2023, 03:31:18 PM »
Hi R2fpl,

Thanks for the input.

Just because I'm using a different type of magnet should not be a waste of time.

My question is what frequency and type of input did you work with? Sine wave, dc pulse? what about fly back effects collecting energy? Just because you try everything under the sun and say I'm wasting my time, is just foolish. This is my experiment and it should be expended with a different mind set and you never will know the outcome until you take the steps.

I welcome your input, but if I listen to everyone in the past, I would have never got to the place I'm at in life today. We all have a journey and our of path in life and not everyone will see eye to eye.

It's never a waste of time if there is something to learn or try. As you may know, not every build have the same results.

Tom..


r2fpl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2023, 04:41:20 PM »
You did not understand me. I'm not saying it's a waste of time for the device, but not understanding what Tom was working with. I'm all about magnets! That's why I think a neodymium magnet will be a waste of time. Of course, as I said, it's my opinion and you don't have to listen to me.

Looking at the patent and what Tom presented, the waveform is square.
The controls are very simple.

Dog-One

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2023, 07:59:45 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY70sZed87I

There must be at least 500 pages of knowledge contained in that build
of yours Atti.  I'm hearing NMR as well as beat frequencies occurring.
What it looks to me like is something well beyond a simple ZPM.
Looking forward to any discoveries you come across.

r2fpl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #4 on: March 02, 2023, 08:04:08 PM »
It is not known where free growth is supposed to come from. I do not know. We can only guess until we find out. If that's true at all.

Since there is nothing miraculous in controlling the waves, you need to look for the construction of the magnet or the construction of METGLASS.
There's also the magnetostrictive effect, and maybe it's the amplification effect.
I've seen a lot of people on the aboveunity forums try various cessations and no one got anything! Therefore, one of the most important things is to move away from the schema and bind it to other properties.
Otherwise, it's duplicating what others have come up with. They probably didn't come.

r2fpl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #5 on: March 02, 2023, 08:06:09 PM »
There must be at least 500 pages of knowledge contained in that build
of yours Atti.  I'm hearing NMR as well as beat frequencies occurring.
What it looks to me like is something well beyond a simple ZPM.
Looking forward to any discoveries you come across.

Yes it can be NMR as well. There are many devices that can be classified as the same.

floodrod

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
    • Mooker.Com- Energy Discovery Forums
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2023, 08:25:23 PM »
I don't want to hijack the thread, but just sharing what I saw when I built a crappy MEG with laminated iron.

I brought it to resonance where the output shifted 90 degrees.  Then pulling a load from the secondary dropped the input like a rock.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HHKFISL5q8&t=2s

I believe pulling a load self inducted to the primary in the form of back-emf.  But many will disagree.  This is one of the many examples that lead me to what I am working with now.  Can we not only harvest Back-EMF, but use it for our advantage.

And I agree-  subjects should be re-studied and all possible configurations tried..  Even if the last explorer ended up in a rut, doesn't mean the path you carve out will lead to the same place.  We will never find what we seek if we don't explore and question everything!

onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2023, 10:09:25 PM »
Hey Tommy
Quote
I welcome your input, but if I listen to everyone in the past, I would have never got to the place I'm at in life today. We all have a journey and our of path in life and not everyone will see eye to eye.

It's never a waste of time if there is something to learn or try. As you may know, not every build have the same results.

I agree 100% and most don't realize what there up against when experimenting. It's hard enough to fabricate something like this then set up all the electronics but there's more to it.

For example, if we have 6 coils switched individually there are 720 possible switching combinations. If each of the six coils could have 100 different frequencies (1 to 100 kHz) there are now 100 million possible coil-frequency combinations. 1000 different frequencies (1 to 1000 kHz) on each coil yields one million billion possible combinations. If we tried one coil/frequency combination each second it would take us 31,709 years to go through them all.

Which begs the question, how long did the other people experiment for on the MEG and how many different variables did they actually try?.

So I think you nailed it when you said not every build has the same results. Sure it's like winning the lottery but someone somewhere wins it every day...

AC





TommeyReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #8 on: March 02, 2023, 11:16:19 PM »
Hi All,

Agree Onepower, It's odd that you mention 0-100khz when in fact I plan to use 3 phase of switching from 0n-
+/0ff/on-+.

Lets say 3 coils on the left and 3 on the right the possibility can be any switching input/output plus direction, not including frequency.

This is a simple drawing to get a idea....


Tom

onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2023, 01:13:11 AM »
Tommy

There is another easier way to test the possible variables. Rather than the extremely slow manual testing I like to program an Arduino to continually adjust the variables and monitor the output. Similar to MPPT (maximum power point tracking) only were trying to find the highest efficiency or COP>1. So if we have variables (X,Y,Z) which the computer is constantly changing we can compare how the variables changed relative to the output.

For example, the basic MPPT logic would be if the output is increasing keep changing the variables in that direction until it's not. When the efficiency stops increasing log the all the values then try changing another variable and repeat. The code is very similar to the Arduino safe cracker code found here...https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/building-a-safe-cracking-robot/all  . In essence the safe cracker keeps changing the variables until it finds something that works similar to what we want, were trying to crack our COP>1.

It begs the question, why dork around with manual testing when a computer could do it thousands of times faster?. So we hit a button and test millions of possible variables giving us the most efficient variables with that setup. Based on this data we can then start tweaking the physical or electric/magnetic setup and run the test again to see how they compare. Not us but our computer compares the data from the different setups giving us some kind of direction. This setup did X and another Y, X was better ergo we should change something to move in that direction.

As well, rather than mess around with Volt/Amp sensors to analyze power I just used a 100w incandescent light bulb and a photodetector tied to the Arduino input to determine output. If it gets brighter as the variables change were moving in the right direction. So this doesn't need to be complicated and a little common sense goes a long way.

AC













TommeyReed

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 327
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2023, 01:39:07 AM »
Hi Onepower,

Yes I agree that a Arduino program is the best way to test it. The Arduino should be able to handle the 100khz x 3 control switching.

Tom

r2fpl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2023, 08:21:37 AM »
If MEG works with NMR then frequency is very important. However, if this were the case, someone would already confirm it, because everyone is looking for the miraculous resonance frequency. Resonance alone will not give us more. A lot of people misunderstand this. Resonance is like a capacitor. You will have as much energy as you put in because the resonance is increased by a force like current, oscillations. Everyone has seen the bridge collapse but they don't understand that the force is accumulated by the wind. The amount of energy is the same.
The coil has the same properties and there is no more energy in it than what you put in it. It doesn't matter how you do it!!!
The only option is to provide additional energy. It could be an NMR transmutation. It can also be magnetostriction or piezoelectric effect or some other form based on the AB effect.
I understand that few will share my opinion because when you understand, you will have a few more years.

onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2023, 06:06:23 PM »
r2fpl
Quote
If MEG works with NMR then frequency is very important. However, if this were the case, someone would already confirm it, because everyone is looking for the miraculous resonance frequency.

Resonance is the point where any conditions present do not tend to oppose the oscillations present. It is the point of maximum efficiency for a given system in oscillation. However as I explained prior, in complex systems with multiple variables/resonances the odds of anyone randomly hitting on the correct combinations of variables is so low it is effectively zero. Were talking about millions or billions of possible combinations.

Quote
Resonance alone will not give us more. A lot of people misunderstand this. Resonance is like a capacitor. You will have as much energy as you put in because the resonance is increased by a force like current, oscillations.

Resonance is defined as "Electrical Resonance. In a circuit when the inductive reactance and the capacitive reactance are equal in magnitude electrical resonance occurs. The resonant frequency in an LC circuit is given by the formula. ω = 1 L C. ω = 2 π f. Where f is the frequency of the resonance, L is the inductance and C is the capacitance."

Resonance is only a means to conserve energy in a system not produce more of it. However, the resonance relationship between two or more systems in oscillation determines the energy flow between them. Which begs the question, what are we supposedly in resonance with?. Since all matter on the atomic scale is in oscillation and/or motion near the speed of light this seems like a good place to start. In effect, nuclear fission/fusion ie. transmutation shows us how much energy is actually present in matter at the atomic scale. Rather than try to smash stuff apart maybe a little finesse is the better option?.

AC



kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1418
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2023, 06:43:17 PM »
You stated earlier that Ted Anis had already done something similar.

onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: Tommey Reed's MEG Experiments
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2023, 07:04:43 PM »
r2fpl
In my opinion NMR is a dead horse because it relates to the absorption and re-emission of electromagnetic radiation. In effect, what we put in is what we get out which is not what we want. We basically change one magnetic field to affect another magnetic field and measure the delay between the two. So I fail to see how this would relate to the extraction of energy.

What generally happens is that an inventor stumbles onto to an effect they don't understand so they throw a conventional label like NMR on it to patent a device. Like the Holcomb device claiming the extra energy comes from electron spins in iron. I suspect they have literally no idea where the extra energy actually comes from but they needed some kind of conventional explanation to patent. Then everyone else jumps on the bandwagon thinking NMR/electron spins must be the answer when it probably has nothing to do with what actually happens.

This is why it's important to keep an open mind and not jump down every rabbit hole which presents itself. It's much better to do our own experiments and formulate our own theories than follow every dog and pony show on the internet.

AC