To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept  (Read 14505 times)

Offline Qwert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #15 on: September 04, 2012, 01:51:07 AM »
Hi. On this new thread one of you said that he was looking for an answer in some sources. Did you see William Beatty's site ? Here's one possibility:
and another one
« Last Edit: September 04, 2012, 03:46:51 AM by Qwert »

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2012, 03:00:43 AM »
Maybe this document will help.

I think adding the core will only concentrate the flux and increase the magnetic flux density
but will not increase the amount of magnetic flux, I'm not sure if will effectively increase the
magnetic field strength, I guess it will  but the field would be more concentrated I guess. (smaller less area)
Then there is flux linkage ect. From what I can deduce adding a core will not increase the magnetic flux itself ( the amount of magnetism)

2.   Magnetic Core Terminology
This list is far from complete, but will be sufficient to either get you started or scare you away. I have included the symbols and units of only three of the entries below, since most are of no real interest.

Coercivity - is the field strength which must be applied to reduce (or coerce) the remanent flux to zero. Materials with high coercivity (e.g. those used for permanent magnets) are called hard. Materials with low coercivity (those used for transformers) are called soft.

Effective Area - of a core is the cross sectional area of the centre limb for E-I laminations, or the total area for a toroid. Usually this corresponds to the physical dimensions of the core but because flux may not be distributed evenly the manufacturer may specify a value which reflects this.

Effective length - of a core is the distance which the magnetic flux travels in making a complete circuit. Usually this corresponds closely to the average of the physical dimensions of the core, but because flux has a tendency to concentrate on the inside corners of the path the manufacturer may specify a value for the effective length.

Flux Density - (symbol; B, unit; Teslas (T)) is simply the total flux divided by the effective area of the magnetic circuit through which it flows.

Flux linkage - in an ideal inductor the flux generated by one turn would be contained within all the other turns. Real coils come close to this ideal when the other dimensions of the coil are small compared with its diameter, or if a suitable core guides the flux through the windings.

Magnetomotive Force - MMF can be thought of as the magnetic equivalent of electromotive force. It is the product of the current flowing in a coil and the number of turns that make up the coil.

Magnetic Field Strength - (symbol: H, unit; ampere metres (A m-1)) when current flows in a conductor, it is always accompanied by a magnetic field. The strength, or intensity, of this field is proportional to the amount of current and inversely proportional to the distance from the conductor (hence the -1 superscript).

Magnetic Flux - (symbol: ; unit: Webers (Wb)) we refer to magnetism in terms of lines of force or flux, which is a measure of the total amount of magnetism.

Permeability - (symbol; µ, units: henrys per metre (Hm-1) is defined as the ratio of flux density to field strength, and is determined by the type of material within the magnetic field - i.e. the core material itself. Most references to permeability are actually to "relative permeability", as the permeability of nearly all materials changes depending upon field strength (and in most cases with temperature as well).

Remanence - (or remnance) is the flux density which remains in a magnetic material when the externally applied field is removed. Transformers require the lowest possible remanence, while permanent magnets need a high value of remanence.


Offline Tito L. Oracion

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2203
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #17 on: September 04, 2012, 04:52:53 AM »
I dont understand why people are seeing that the "MEG" has some potential while not  seeing that a traditional iron core electromagnet is also having  some phenomenal  potential as well (if you want to see it that way).  Let me explain, The whole concept of flynn/Radus MEG is that you turn off the magnetpower with a power seemingly  less than  that of the magnet itself. in the case of FLynn the  total force is 3700grams   from which is 1100 grams  that you pay for coming from an electromagnet. so you are using 1/3 of the power  to  gate the magnetic flux which seems to be a key to overunity. I thought it to be  the final key to overunity until  a extremely simple thought hit me: an  iron electromagnet is in fact much much more effective..  how? well  for a single simple iron core el.magnet you are also only putting a 1/200th of the  power!!! to power and control the electromagnet. In the flynn MEG you  use 1100grams out of 3800 which is roughly 1/3 of the power..  you see where I am going?

 Im not sure if I am absolutely right or  if my   meaning didnt go through, but your explanation to why  my original iron-core-aircore theory wouldnt work SHOULD precisely  apply as well to  the flynn device.


Everything has a potential like everyone has a potential, overunity is just an ARRANGEMENT  that's why many overunity device cannot be sold because the arrangement is so easy to copy.

its like a small fire that can become a very big fire.

MEG has a special winding arrangement that's why it can make energy more than input.

now if you want to know free energy then study tesla and all his patents deeply.  ;)
 especially those that makes high potential, high current ....

like for example here:

if you add coils to other part of the core of the Transformer is not the way to overunity but to boost it first then collect.  ;)
and that is the way!


Offline Newton II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #18 on: September 04, 2012, 05:45:26 AM »
Hi everyone.

I have an idea and wonder why no body even thought about it, and I would love to know why it wouldnt work:

We all know  that a certain air-core coil at a given current will produce a certain magnetic field
take that same coil and  put an iron inside it and you will amplify the magnetic field 100 to  1000s of times... FOR THE SAME  INPUT CURRENT!!!

You are forgetting the reverse of it.    If you put iron inside air core,  it will definitely  amplify the magnetic field 100 to 1000 times.  But reversely  it also means that you should have variation of 100 to 1000 times flux  to produce the given current in the same core.   If you remove iron materials from the coils of a normal generator and rotate the magnetic poles infront of air cores,  will it generate same electricity as a normal generator?   IT will not.   Flux of the magnet has to amplified 100 to 1000 times using iron materials to get normal elecricity production.

I think Fatbirds answer is right.   From air core you will not get anything.


Offline Paul-R

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1990
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2012, 04:30:13 PM »
and you will amplify the magnetic field 100 to  1000s of times... FOR THE SAME  INPUT CURRENT!!!
I don't think so. Surely the current to "fill" the iron cored coil will be greater.

Offline leviterande

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #20 on: September 04, 2012, 09:04:20 PM »
This is really a truly  positive and nice forum and I appreciate all the responses
Paul, I  agree.  shouldn't this also mean that all the MEG devices concepts are pure  bogus too?  Seriously we maybe and I mean "MAYBE" shouldn't be fooled that  a permanent magnet "ingredience" in a  device will magically solve the overunity issue and this will lead me to my main point of the issue:

if you need a free STATIC magnetic field, you  ofcourse  choose a magnet
, however  most forget that a  good ferromagnetic electromagnet also PRODUCES  superior static magnetic field with  very  small power.

Hoever now,   one said that an iron core  "only concentrates the flux" and not strengthening it. if this is the case than,  all the ideas  written by me are 100% meaningless and 100% invalid, because   there is no difference in this case between an iron core and an air core... well... all hopes are 100% gone in this case.. but really. Im saying... is the magnetic flex only concentrated  and never increased?. Anyway.. Total lifting power is much stronger in an iron cored coil..


Offline leviterande

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Re: A truly interesting transformer overunity concept
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2012, 01:55:13 AM »
I may be  a stupid, foolish ignorant guy but please explain to my little mind how   the Flynn concept could ever  be cabaple of OverUnity, why is it so hyped when a simple electromagnet is far superior obviously:
Why  I think so? For the heck of it and to show my  main  point/question lets just first  see the following TWO examples:
1-Flynn device: is claimed to output 3.5 times more than  " input/other electromagnets/otherdevices etc"  ha?? how can you even say such a thing..electromagnets can be made from inefficient to super efficient. a flynn PP device consumed like 0.2watts,  and outputted 650grams.
W/o the magnets it outputted 200g.  So wait a second...,the electromagnet here did only lift 200g, Thats a very very weak electromagnet and we could as well get rid of the PP path and the magnets and just work on the electromagnet part. In other words, we can throw the magnets and for the same 0.2 watts we can get 40lbs out of the coil itself, instead of 1.5lbs(650grams)

  B = 4Ï€ x(10 -7)x k x n x I
2 -A ferromagnetic core electromagnet:  on the other hand lifts 1200lbs with 6watts at 12v and 0.5A and a toy magnet will lift 500lbs with  2 D-cells

so whats the difference here? ha? its all about the power in vs  whats comig out.
I really hope you get my point here, Im not making any theory or any opinion. Im not saying that an electromagnet will produce overunity. Im just stating  that  Flynn device  is nothing more than  n "elegant strange looking" electromagnet that isnt even strong  or efficient as other   stronger ones...and I really really want to know why the flynn meg idea is any BETTER than just a rather standard electromagnet..... why all this hype ;)