The magnet could of been subject to preconditioning. Beardon received
information from Sweet and claimed he couldn't release any
information due to law suits from Sweet's contibutors.

There is no mention of preconditioning in the patent. The end result
is that interested parties will have to purchase one to find out how
it works if it ever becomes available.

DTB

>    From: "martin_b195" <martin_b195@...>

> I've read a lot of the web postings and newsgroup postings, but I
> haven't yet found any explanation of why the MEG apparently only
> works with non-linear and time-varying loads (e.g. gas discharge
> lamps) on high-voltage outputs. Has any explanation been published?

I published my speculations related to that question
more than a year ago.  You can read them on my website at:

http://www.flyinghouse.com/creator/science/meg/megspec.html

Actually, that is more of a "how" speculation about using switching
to achieve the real purpose of the non-linear load.  As to the "why",
I believe it has to do with what Bearden often speaks of as "regauging"
- i.e., by switching the load, the MEG "grabs the brass ring" as it
comes around, taking advantage of the entrained Poynting flow by
re-referencing it to a load.  Or, another way to look at it: eliminate
the effect of "back EMF" during the time when input power is driving
the steering coils, then switch in the load when the permanent
magnet is driving the flux change.

Just my two cents worth of pure speculation.  Let me know what you
think.

Regards,

-Dann
============================================================
Dann McCreary http://flyinghouse.com creator@...
============================================================
"Since you are precious in My sight, Since you are honored
  and I love you,  I will give other men in  your place and
  other peoples in exchange for your life." - Isaiah 43
============================================================

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "creator" <creator@f...> wrote:

(Heavily snipped)

> Actually, that is more of a "how" speculation about using switching
> to achieve the real purpose of the non-linear load.  As to
the "why",
> I believe it has to do with what Bearden often speaks of
as "regauging"
> - i.e., by switching the load, the MEG "grabs the brass ring" as it
> comes around, taking advantage of the entrained Poynting flow by
> re-referencing it to a load.

> Or, another way to look at it: eliminate
> the effect of "back EMF" during the time when input power is driving
> the steering coils, then switch in the load when the permanent
> magnet is driving the flux change.

For what it's worth re: eliminating back EMF, I agree with you.  But
just how this is accomplished, has yet to be shown/determined :-)

Just MY two cents :-)

Stan

Stan,

>For what it's worth re: eliminating back EMF, I agree with you.  But just
how this is accomplished, has yet to be shown/determined :-)

Have you read my energy pulse model yet?

http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/c2_and_longitudinal_waves.htm

The qualities of mass and energy cannot transcend the limits of the material
universe.  But the qualities of conductance, inductance, and capacitance
belong to the aether and are not subject to the limitations of E=mc^2.

Dave

Hi Martin,

----- Original Message -----
From: martin_b195 <martin_b195@...>
To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 10:34 PM
Subject: [MEG_builders] Request for information


> I've read a lot of the web postings and newsgroup postings, but I
> haven't yet found any explanation of why the MEG apparently only
> works with non-linear and time-varying loads (e.g. gas discharge
> lamps)

Forget about non linear loads.  Bearden's MEG does not require non linear
loads.

> on high-voltage outputs.

The MEG patent says that the voltage output can be any value you want just
by changing the turns ratio.

> Has any explanation been published?

You could try to understand Bearden's explanation -grin-.

> Or has anyone published experimental results that show that it also
> works with linear loads on low-voltage outputs?

Bearden's original MEG paper shows results with a linear load.

> And secondly, I've built and used inductors, transformers, and
> switching circuits for many years, and experimented with and used
> magnets since I was a kid. I've learned at first hand that magnetic
> devices are about as consistent and reproducible as the other
> products of "conventional" physics. Transformers, inductors, and
> permanent magnets roll off the production lines by the million every
> single day without a problem. So can anyone explain why it is so
> difficult to reproduce the experimental results reported by the
> original inventors?

The original inventors have not revealed the fine detail of their invention
(like how they wind their coils).

> Are there any papers out there that talk about
> this?

Jean-Louis Naudin claims to have replicated the MEG results, but he needed a
non-linear load.  I am analysing the latest info from the patent (it tells
us some coil details like numbers of turns).  This may lead me towards some
form of explanation (which will be about number 100 of useless explanations
for how it works!)

Regards
Cyril

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "David Thomson" <dave@v...> wrote:
> Stan,
>
> (You wrote)
>
> >For what it's worth re: eliminating back EMF, I agree with you.
> > But just how this is accomplished, has yet to be
> >shown/determined :-)
>
> Have you read my energy pulse model yet?
>
> http://www.tesla-coil-builder.com/c2_and_longitudinal_waves.htm
>
> The qualities of mass and energy cannot transcend the limits of the
material
> universe.  But the qualities of conductance, inductance, and
capacitance
> belong to the aether and are not subject to the limitations of
E=mc^2.
>
> Dave
---------------------------
Dave,

Yes, I have sped reviewed the information at your site.   It appears
that you have a solid grasp on math and theory.  Sadly I could not
find any pictures or schematics of your MEG.  Perhaps they are on
another page at your site.  With all your knowledge, I am sure you
are either building one or are about to.  I am looking forward to
seeing your formulas and theories applied to the MEG as that is what
this site is about.  As you know, there is a tremendous amount of
theoretical stuff out there but apparently darned few people that are
willing to actually test their theories :-).   I really look forward
to seeing your MEG test results!

Very best regards,

Stan
P.S. If there is anyway that I can help you with your meg ... like
perhaps recommendations for sources for parts, methods for achieving
fast current transition times in your primaries and like that, please
don't hesitate to contact me.

Hi Stan,

>Yes, I have sped reviewed the information at your site.   It appears that
you have a solid grasp on math and theory.  Sadly I could not find any
pictures or schematics of your MEG.  Perhaps they are on another page at
your site.  With all your knowledge, I am sure you are either building one
or are about to.

I started working on the MEG, actually a crossbreed between Tesla's black
box and the MEG (they both use the same technology).  When I started this
project I realized I had to fully understand the math and science behind it.
So I have a complete collection of all known Tesla writings, patents, and
many articles about him.  I have also studied Bearden's MEG paper.  As I was
studying Tesla's work from HIS point of view, I began to see a more coherent
model of energy, which resulted in the paper referenced in my other post.

As a result of my mathematical and theoretical discoveries, I felt compelled
to apply for a federal grant for fully developing the energy pulse model.
I'm currently waiting for the NSF approval or decline.  Just last night
someone offered me 20 acres with a log cabin in a remote area with telephone
and electricity and some spending money.  So now I have to get prepared to
move my lab in about a month or so.

Just this morning I received an email from a Canadian physics professor with
some important information that I am certain I can use to unify gravity and
charge.  So now I will be working a couple days on that, too.

Right now I'm in the process of building special flat spiral / solenoid
secondary coil combinations in the likeness of Tesla's Wardencliffe system.
I'm almost finished with the construction.  This coil, along with my rack
mount full of test equipment will begin to provide me with solid data to
pinpoint the exact nature of aether conductance and how to exploit it.  From
there I will finally build a working model.

I have been following the MEG-Builders group for a year or so.  But I have
also been methodically knocking off all the necessary chores before building
a working MEG device.  I don't like working in the dark a la Thomas Edison
trial and error methods.  I want to hone in precisely on the technology and
provide a fool-proof, reproducible energy generator that works for anybody
who builds one.

In the meantime, if you would like, I can keep you guys abreast of my
discoveries and guide you as I have time.  If not, I can wait until I have
the time, data and resources to build my own unit.   And then I'll share the
information.

Dave

New ideas about the MEG, or maybe some of you have already though of
this?
In stead of using two primary coils, we could cut open two slits in
the MEG core where we use to put the primary coils, and put in some
material that will block magnetic flux with small input of
electricity. I do not know if such material exist, but someone told
me it could be done.

Then the flux will switch between the two secondary coils with only
small input energy.

Some other thought about how to improve the COP. If the volume in the
secondary coil is much larger then the volume in the primary coil, we
will only need small amount of energy in the primary coil to
stop/start a large amount of magnetic energy in the secondary coil.

If there were no losses in the core or the rest of the MEG, the COP
would be depending on:
(Magnetic volume of secondary coils) / (magnetic volume of primary
coils)

So a very long core that will make it possible to make very long
secondary coils, and very short primary coils might give OU.

Just some thoughts…

Svein Utne

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "sveinutne" <utne@m...> wrote:
(Reply embedded)
> New ideas about the MEG, or maybe some of you have already though
of
> this?
> In stead of using two primary coils, we could cut open two slits in
> the MEG core where we use to put the primary coils, and put in some
> material that will block magnetic flux with small input of
> electricity. I do not know if such material exist, but someone told
> me it could be done.

Svein,

IMHO, this is an idea that I am sure has crossed the minds of many
many of us :-)   If there is such a material, it would be
revolutionary to say the least!!!!!  And it would make the
construction of a MEG like device relatively easy!   Boy howdy!!!
Please please find that material and tell us about it as soon as
possible.   My bet ... and I sure hope I am wrong ... is that you
will have a long search :-)

Best regards,

Stan

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Thomson" <dave@...>
To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: [MEG_builders] Re: Request for information

> Just this morning I received an email from a Canadian physics professor
with
> some important information that I am certain I can use to unify gravity
and
> charge.  So now I will be working a couple days on that, too.
>
> Right now I'm in the process of building special flat spiral / solenoid
> secondary coil combinations in the likeness of Tesla's Wardencliffe
system.
> I'm almost finished with the construction.  This coil, along with my rack
> mount full of test equipment will begin to provide me with solid data to
> pinpoint the exact nature of aether conductance and how to exploit it.
From
> there I will finally build a working model.



Hi David,

This is my first MEG post. That paper relating gravity to charge sure sounds
interesting. Electro- or magneto- gravity modification is an ongoing
interest of mine.

I came across a Tesla patent ( US685012 ) which stated that he submerged the
flat coil in a cold bath of liquid air to affect an "extraordinary
magnification of intensity in the resonant circuit". I am not on any of the
Tesla lists so I don't know if this is being done today, but it sure sounds
like an interesting idea for reducing coil resistance. Lots of swirling
mists generated also for neat effects  :-)

Best Regards,
Colin Quinney

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "louisgjordan" <louisgjordan@y...> wrote:
> This technology sounds great and I am a believer that free energy
is
> possible and even that the government is keeping us from advancing
> technologically.  I really want to believe in the MEG devices and
> help get the word out after I become a confirmed believer.  Does
> anyone have a working model near SC, GA or NC?  Are there actual
> schematics on how to actually build a working unit?

I would like to suggest that you and the many other new to the site
members take a little time to read the messages and message archives
of our site and I think you will find that there only a few meg
builders on this site and for that matter probably very few
elsewhere.   Its just the way it is.   Lots of theorists and watchers
though.  Anyway, in the files area you will find some experiment
notes and schematics of SOME experiments.  As for working MEGs, there
are only two reported ones that I know of ... of course the one by
Bearden and the replication by Jean Louis Naudin.  You may want to
visit Bearden's and Naudin's sites for more meg info (see the home
page of this site for where these are at) and particularly check out
the recent and exciting patent paper by Thomas Bearden and fellows in
the files section of this site.

> So far, from the limited research I have done, I can tell that the
> schematics that MEG builders are using do not work properly because
> the original MEG inventors are keeping the coil a secret.

Hmmmm, really.

> This,
> type of secretive stuff is making little alarms go off in my head.
> I do not want to be suspicious.  I really want to know this stuff
> works.  I have gone into trances and flown through the air without
> the aid of machines.

I suspect that whatever secrets there are are kept that way for some
good reasons, like protecting pending patents and like that.

> I know I have done this, but the majority of
> people will not believe me, and it makes little difference to me
> whether they do or not, but those few who want to believe me, who
> think it might be possible, I tell them to go experiance it for
> themselves and give them clear instructions on how to do it.  I
dont
> keep the instructions a secret, I will tell anyone who wants to
> know, how they can enter the spiritual worlds.  They will have to
> internaly work for it but it can be done.

Hmmmm.   How does this relate to meg building?

> Now, the MEG builders have created this machine that most people
> would rather ridicule then suspect it might really exist.  I really
> want to know how it works and if it works, tell others about it,
but
> I do not understand all the secrets.

Yes and many many meg experimenters are looking for the secrets too.

> That just makes me and most
> logical minded people very suspicious.  So, are there complete
> schematics on how to build this device, or not?  Is this a scam or
> not?

Could be a scam but I personally don't think so.

> BTW: I have looked into Dennis Lee's claims before and his
> collecting millions of dollars and making and breaking promises has
> not helped those who really want to believe in free-energy and now
> the MEG secrets are not helping my interests in it either.

Who is Dennis Lee?  Has he built a meg?

Very best regards,

Stan Mayer ... a moderator for MEG builders

Hi Colin,

I agree with your assessment.  I'm aware of the patent.  It turns out that
conductance is a quality of the aether and not of energy/mass.  It happens
that conductance is the inverse of resistance, however.  What this means to
me is that if the resistance is reduced to near zero then the conductance is
increased to a very high value.  So the submerging in liquid air of any
device that uses the quality of inductance for its power source will result
in greater power output.

Heat is an enemy of the MEG.

If you want to discuss Coulomb's Plane and Gravity, we could do that on the
spiral coils list.  This list is very focused on the MEG device only.

Dave

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "mayerstan" <StanMayer@c...> wrote:
> --- In MEG_builders@y..., "sveinutne" <utne@m...> wrote:
> (Reply embedded)
> > New ideas about the MEG, or maybe some of you have already though
> of
> > this?
> > In stead of using two primary coils, we could cut open two slits
in
> > the MEG core where we use to put the primary coils, and put in
some
> > material that will block magnetic flux with small input of
> > electricity. I do not know if such material exist, but someone
told
> > me it could be done.
>
> Svein,
>
> IMHO, this is an idea that I am sure has crossed the minds of many
> many of us :-)   If there is such a material, it would be
> revolutionary to say the least!!!!!  And it would make the
> construction of a MEG like device relatively easy!   Boy howdy!!!
> Please please find that material and tell us about it as soon as
> possible.   My bet ... and I sure hope I am wrong ... is that you
> will have a long search :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Stan

Hi Stan,

To block the magnetic flux with a material with only small input of
electricity was maybe too much to ask for. What I am looking for is
some material that will change its magnetic characteristic.  Even a
small change could be useful if you can hold high frequencies.

In transistors you have materials that change its magnetic
characteristic, and it can do so very rapidly. You can use
electricity or light diodes or flash heating. All this can make the
material change its magnetic characteristic. With light diodes, only
some milliwatts can make changes.

The aim will be to find a material where we can put in small amount
of energy and get a change in the magnetic characteristic, so we can
pick up more energy from the secondary coils then we put in.

If some of you have some ideas, it would be fine.

Svein Utne

Hi Mike,

I know of Aspden's work.  Incidentally I will be going to the 2nd Berlin
Conference for Innovative Energy Technologies in June and I hope to meet
Aspden there (he is presenting a paper "Our Future Energy Source - The
Vacuum").  It looks like being an interesting three days, with names like
Hal Fox, the Graneau Brothers Peter and Neil, Paramahamsa Tewari and many
more!

Cyril

----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Watson <mike@...>
To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [MEG_builders] Re: (Info) GOOD NEWS : The Tom Bearden's MEG IS
PATENTED


Hi Cyril,

I have been wondering whether the reported OU of the MEG is an example of
thermodynamic adiabatic cooling. The change in entropy due to domain
rotation extracting heat from the core itself. Aspden has a patent for a
motor using this process US 4,975,608. If this process were to suck up I2R
losses plus environmental heat it could make the MEG appear OU. The
dependance of the MEG on the material in the core could point in this
direction. Also the use of neodymium magnets could easily bring the iron
close to the  saturation point where the BH curve is very non-linear and
cooling process would occur.

If this were the case, the timing of the input current waveform becomes all
important. Incidently I believe Aspden actually built his motor, he got some
government funding!

Regards

Mike

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Cyril SMITH
   To: MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 8:28 PM
   Subject: Re: [MEG_builders] Re: (Info) GOOD NEWS : The Tom Bearden's MEG
IS PATENTED


   Hi Mike,

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Mike Watson <mike@...>
   To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
   Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 8:31 PM
   Subject: Re: [MEG_builders] Re: (Info) GOOD NEWS : The Tom Bearden's MEG
IS
   PATENTED


   > Hi Cyril,
   >
   > Yes I agree, that is why I said average current and average volts to get
   the power. The best way is using a calorimeter, but that is surprisingly
   difficult. I remember Harold Putoff discussing this very fact. He found
that
   even commercial broad band calorimeters were frequently in error. The
   problem is in those ever present high amplitude fast spikes which require
   very high sampling rates to capture with a scope and of course these
spikes
   are shunted by the self capacity of  monitoring resistors etc etc.
   >
   > I suppose connecting output to input is the only sure way with a load
   connected at the same time.
   >
   > By the way, I know you built a MEG are you going to have another go at
it
   in the light (if any) of the patent?

   No I will leave that to others.  I see nothing in the patent to give me a
   warm feeling about replication.  I would not be surprised to find
   replication difficult because of what is NOT in the patent.  What the
patent
   does give me is the info to allow me to do a more detailed analysis of the
   fluxes and mmf's inside the MEG, to help search out exacly where the OU
   occurs (is it in the primary?, is it in the secondary?, is it in the
   magnet?, is it in the core?).  I will report back when I have some
results.

   Regards
   Cyril



         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT




   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





   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "Dave N." <dnarby@s...> wrote:

> Jean, et. al.,
>
> Here are some selected excerpts from my correspondence with
> Bearden pertaining to the MEG and the points Jean (Naudin)has
> raised .... (snipped here for brevity)

Dave,

Thanks so much for posting this.   While this is all interesting
stuff, as a practical experimenter I find the new (dated 4/3/02)in-
line quoted message from Naudin to be of particular interest. Thank
you for posting this!!!!!  Please keep your Bearden correspondence
and news from Naudin coming.   I think many of us at the site
appreciate your doing this.

Very best regards,

Stan

P.S.  A by-the-way for the reader ... Dave Narby is a VALUED co-
moderator of this site.

--- In MEG_builders@y..., "Cyril SMITH" <cyrilsmith@c...> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> I know of Aspden's work.  Incidentally I will be going to the 2nd
Berlin
> Conference for Innovative Energy Technologies in June and I hope to
meet
> Aspden there (he is presenting a paper "Our Future Energy Source -
The
> Vacuum").  It looks like being an interesting three days, with
names like
> Hal Fox, the Graneau Brothers Peter and Neil, Paramahamsa Tewari
and many
> more!
>
> Cyril
>

Cyril,

I hope you come back from the conference with something that can be
related to the MEG.  Remember that this what our site is about :-)

Stan

Dear group,

I've been fascinated, like make others, about free energy for quite
some time. One thing though, i'm not an electrician or understand
electronics a great deal.

I have been reading some of the papers and patent of the MEG device.
Can't say I totally understand it. Is there something this is written
for the layman? I would like a very basic explanantion of how this
device works. All I know is that power is being sucked from a magnet
which is replenished from the 4th dimension (time) via the aether.

Mike Keys

--------

Mike,

Check out

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/megdsqth.htm

For Dave Squires' excellent explanation.

Dave N.

Hi Stan,

----- Original Message -----
From: mayerstan <StanMayer@...>
To: <MEG_builders@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 6:01 AM
Subject: [MEG_builders] Re: (Info) GOOD NEWS : The Tom Bearden's MEG IS
PATENTED
snip...

> Cyril,
>
> I hope you come back from the conference with something that can be
> related to the MEG.  Remember that this what our site is about :-)
>
> Stan

Thanks for reminding me :-))  Although the MEG is not a topic for
presentation at the conference there are related ones, like the vacuum as an
energy source.  Also I hope to meet other researchers in the MEG field,
maybe JLN will be there.

Regards
Cyril

Hi All,

Here is my considered opinion on the internal workings of the MEG.

1.  The secondary capacitance plays an important role.  The output waveforms
are distorted sine waves, not square waves.  If there were no capacitance
the outputs would be square pulses.

2.  The circulating currents in the secondary tank circuits have a far
greater role in shuttling the flux back and forth than the primary current.
The usual view that the primary currents steer the flux is somewhat
erroneous (but see later remarks).

3.  The main driving action is not from the current switched from the DC
power supply.  The main driving action comes from the switching transitors
applying a short circuit to the primary coils.

4.  When you short out a coil you apply a very high magnetic impedance in
series with the magnetic circuit at that physical point in the magnetic
circuit (i.e. just under the coil).  This acts as a flux blocker.  (In
simple terms if the flux tries to change value it creates a current in the
shorted coil to oppose that change).  When the shorting transistor is
switched on it has the effect of open circuiting that magnetic limb to any
future flux change (the flux in the limb remaining constant).

5.  You can now visualise the alternate shorting of the two primary coils as
acting like a single pole two way magnetic change-over switch.  The magnet
is switched to each arm in turn by this method.

6.  If you did this without tickling up the tank circuits the result would
be zero.  The magnet supplies constant flux to both limbs, the alternate
shorting actions do nothing because there is no change of flux taking place.

7.  But if the tank circuits are somehow energised, so that there are AC
flux changes going on, and the shorting action is synchronised with the AC,
then the magnet being switched magnetically from one arm to the other could
support the AC waveform.  (This would make an interesting experiment.  Don't
feed DC power to the drive circuit, just have the transistors acting as
short circuits.  Externally shock excite the resonant secondary tank
circuit, watch the decay time constant (tau=2*Q/omega).  Now repeat the
experiment but this time synchronously switch the shorting transitors, see
if the time constant increases to indicate energy being supplied by the
magnet.)

8.  The small DC energy supplied by the DC power source is there to overcome
losses in the drive circuit.  Note the DC level of the current waveforms in
the Patent and in Bearden's original MEG paper.  With a normal push-pull
drive circuit you would expect unidirectional half sine current pulses.  The
MEG waveforms are not unidirectional.  The current (taken from a DC supply)
is definitely AC.  During part of the cycle current is being fed back into
the power source.  This is not normal push-pull flux switching action.

9.  The point in the AC cycle where the shorting/switching takes place is
probably critical.  It is wrong to expect to be able to drive in a square
wave and get the thing to work as most reseachers have found (this will be
more like normal push-pull action).  It is probably necessary to control the
switching point with reference to the output waveform, and that requires
some extra (but not too sophisticated) electronic circuitry.  Note the
position of the switching transients on the published output waveforms.
That phase delay is a forced situation.  You won't get that with normal
push-pull drive.

10.  The timing for the change-over action is also probably critical.  Is
there a "make before break" action?  Is there a small time gap?  There is
plenty of scope for experimentation here.

Regards
Cyril

for Mike and others who missed it my "Bearden for Beginners" - type
article
is still there at:  http://www.prahlad.org/pub/bearden/scalar_wars.htm

I tried to introduce some of Bearden's main ideas in a way the layman
could grasp (being a certified layman myself!).

Bill Morgan

OK what is COP?

What about using more powerful magnets or what about inducing the
flux withing a plasma core instead of metal(not trying to do fusion,
but think of the free electrons!!)

Most fusion reactors work (at least in the toroidal model) my using
strong magnetic fields to compress the plasma stream. What if it
could work in reverse? What if we could use the natural tendencies of
the plasma to carry the "load"?

Inserted into the plasma would be the output leads. So, as the plasma
flew by the output, it would stimultate the transfer of electrons to
whatever you have attached.

I'm not a physicist so please help me out.

MK

Hi All,

Further to my last post here is a sketch of the basic theory (stitched into
a previous sketch on flux calculations).

Regards
Cyril

IMO, you're latest MEG theory shows promise! I plan to do some testing this weekend based on your ideas and will post the results. I think your concept has more potential for producing the MEG's input current waveform than any other I've seen.

I also find it curious as to why they are using the drive FETs in a source follower mode as this presents many new design problems with the gate drive circuitry!?! This type of drive connection would however allow the regulation of drive voltage levels simply with changes in gate drive voltage levels since the voltage gain of the FETs would be close to unity, but, there would also be a penalty of additional dissipation in the FETs. Hmmmm!

Regards,
Jon

Cyril SMITH wrote:

 Hi All,

Further to my last post here is a sketch of the basic theory (stitched into
a previous sketch on flux calculations).

Regards
Cyril
 

Hello,

US Patent 6,271,614 is a high energy plasma device that
has tapped the Zero Point Energy field. Like Chernetskii,
Shoulders & the Correas, I also use a Plasma, however of unique
production means and properties.

Other features are instant water cracking & methane cracking of
Waste oils as the co-production of mechanical energy is produced.

Besides negative entropy is another unique feature - Current
continually drops as mechanical load is applied to the latest
prototype.

http://members.aol.com/hypercom59/index.html

Chris

Can anyone tell me if there has been any word on a MEG product coming
to market within the year?  Has there been any word from the MEG team
on this?

Chris

Hi Jon,

Thanks for the encouragement.  Here is another pic showing the idea.

Cyril

Hi Cyril and all,

I've run some preliminary tests of your MEG theory Cyril by using my MEG setup
consisting of an AMCC-125 core set with 65 turn primaries, 600 turn secondaries,
and a small stack of 1/2" cube NIB's inserted in the core. I've attached 2 gifs
which show waveforms with the following descriptions-

CH1 is the gate drive signal to the FET supplying current to the secondary
winding.
CH2 is the drain voltage of the FET.
CH3 is the FET's drain current.
CH4 is the current thru the shorted primary.

Although I initially tried synchronized switching of the shorted primary, I
found that due to the leakage inductance from the driven secondary to shorted
primary, the decay differences from an open to shorted primary were so large,
that it made decay comparisons difficult. So, I chose to leave the primary
shorted thru the entire cycle and also to reverse polarities of the secondary
rather than remove the PMs for decay comparison.

Ct1.gif shows the decay comparison with superimposed traces on CH2 and CH4. The
current probe was reversed on the polarity change so CH4 would always appear in
the same phasing. Ct2.gif shows the same traces but with separation between the
stored reference and active traces of CH2 and CH4.

I'm not finished testing, but thought this might be of interest and would surely
welcome any suggestions!

Regards,

Jon

--
Obstacles are the things that a person sees when he takes
his eyes off the goal.      - E. Joseph Cossman-

The message below was copied from:

Http://www.atomasoft.com/zpenergy/1017894087/index_html

Demonstration of Bearden's MEG for Congress w/ Dr. Greer?

Posted by Patrick Knowles on Wednesday April 03, @08:21PM

Steven M. Greer, M.D. of the Disclosure Project has recently said
that several members of the U.S. Congress have agreed to arrange for
a
demonstration in chambers of any proven over-unity device to members
of the appropriate Congressional committees.

Greer has been in touch with Dr. Bearden previously, and includes an
interview with him in his book, Disclosure. Now that the MEG has been
patented, will Dr. Bearden be working with the Disclosure Project to
demonstrate it to Congress?

I realize that if plans are already underway for such ademonstration,
they may be sensitive and necessarily private at this point. But if a
Congressional demonstration is not yet in the works, I hope
Dr.Beardon will be in touch with Dr. Greer once again so that
arrangements can be made. The patenting of the MEG could be a real
breakthrough for Disclosure on the technological front. Does anyone
know if Dr. Beardon is working with Dr. Greer at this point? Would Dr.
Beardon like to comment on this?

DTB