|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
The MEG
(The Motionless
Electromagnetic
Generator)
Invented by
- Thomas E.
Bearden, Ph.D.
James C. Hayes,
Ph.D. James L.
Kenny, Ph.D.
Kenneth D.
Moore, B.S.
Stephen L.
Patrick, B.S.
United States
Patent 6,362,718
B1
|
|
| |
The MEG
Replication Project
by hyiq.org
Please Note: The MEG
is a Patented
Device. hyiq.org has
been granted
permission for this
Replication by The
MEG's Inventors.
|
Tom Bearden "One
build-up has produced up
to 100 times more power
than was input"

A basic idea on how The
MEG Works.
The MEG has some
history. Although
patented in 2002 by
Thomas E. Bearden, Ph.D.
James C. Hayes, Ph.D.
James L. Kenny, Ph.D.
Kenneth D. Moore, B.S.
Stephen L. Patrick, B.S.
The MEG has operational
characteristics of many
other devices throughout
History. Some may
disagree with my opinion
but that's all this page
is about, my opinion on
how the MEG Works.
Simply put, The MEG is
See-Sawing
Electromagnetic Flux
from the Permanent
Magnet from side to side
of the MetGlas Cores.
As the name suggests The
MEG is a Generator, just
a stationary one. The
actual EMF Generated in
the Output Coils is
induced in a slightly
different manner than
the EMF Generated in a
Conventional Generator,
or at least how current
theory says EMF is
Generated in Generators.
We must remember the
great Michael Faraday
only said, we only have to
have a Flux move in
relation to the
Conductor to generate an EMF in the conductor.
A Magnet's Flux is made
up of several things
(called vectors and
potentials), we look at
these forces in a manner
where we can define
these forces in a manner
similar to a River. This
is similar to
Electricity, Flow and
Current. Flow can be the
amount of water flowing
in a River, or Volts in
a Electrical Circuit
and, Current, how much
force or power the Flow
is travelling at,
similar to the Current
in an Electrical
Circuit. These
differences are defined
as the H field, (Current
or strength) and the B
Field, (Flow or volume).
Looking at Magnetic, or
Electromagnetic Flux is
made simple when viewed
in these terms.
To move Magnetic or
Electromagnetic Flux
requires Force. In the
terms of a River, to
stop the flow of a river
we must have a river
flowing, equal in Flow
and Current, flowing in
the opposite direction
to the River we wish to
stop.
Like in the Flux-Gate
Magnetometers, it is
very important to look
at The MEG in two
halves. One half on one
side and the other half
on the other side. Each
side containing a Power
Coil and an Actuator
Coil. The Power coil and
Actuator Coil on one
side do not match up as
a pair. In fact the
Power Coil on one side
matches up with the
Actuator Coil on the
opposing half of The
MEG.
In an idle state, The
MEG has equal Flux in
each side of the Core.
The idea is that we want
to create an imbalance
with our input.
In The MEG we are
stopping the Flow of
Electromagnetic Flux
from the Permanent
Magnet on one side of
The MEG at a time, (this
is not entirely
accurate, not quite
stopping), more
accurately we are
re-diverting some
Electromagnetic Flux,
from the permanent
Magnet, but we are using
the opposing Path for
this redirection, the
Flux from this path,
then moves into the
opposing side of the
Core. Because we have
one MEG and two paths,
we are simply closing
one Path while having
the opposing path open.
This makes for greater
efficiency's in the
amount of force to move
the Electromagnetic
Flux.
A Quote from Gabriel
Kron:
"...the missing concept
of "open-paths" (the
dual of "closed-paths")
was discovered, in which
currents could be made
to flow in branches that
lie between any set of
two nodes."
Ok, is Gabriel Kron
talking about Electrical
Currents or could it be
he is talking about
Magnetic Currents?
Magnetic Currents have
been referred to before
by many people through
history and we have
referred to them above.
Gabriel Krons reference
to "Nodes" is a
Di-Pole.
One set of two Poles. A
Permanent Magnet is a
Di-Pole, North and South
Poles.
On our Input we create an imbalance, or
difference in potentials
on each side of the
cores will give us two
effects in the one
action that we input.
1: Flux moved across
will induce an EMF in
the opposing Power Coil
on the other side of the
MEG.
2: Electromagnetic Flux
return will create an
EMF on the same side as
the DC Pulse was Input.
Thus two actions output
for only one action we
put in. The Free action
is Action Two. This is
Free because Nature is
inputting Energy to
bring the system back
into its state of
balance, referred to
above, equal
Electromagnetic Flux in
each side of the core
when The MEG is in an
idle state. This is what
Tom Bearden refers to
as Equilibrium, and how
Nature will bring
systems back into an
Equilibrium State for
Free.
We have a few things to
think about now. On time
of our input. Off time
of our input and also
the timing of the clock
cycle or driving
frequency of our input.
Remembering we need On
time of our input to
re-divert the
Electromagnetic Flux into
the opposite path and
just as important Off
time to allow the
Electromagnetic Flux to
move back into our then
closed path when our
input was On, the same
path which is now Open
when our input is off.
The MEG Simulations:
The Basic architecture
of the MEG, Magnet
Placement and Actuator
coil alignment and pole
directions.

Graphed Input to the
Actuator Coils:

Animation slowed down so
it is visible what's is
happening in The MEG

For more detailed
information please read
on.
|
|
The Core -
Metglas®
Alloy 2605SA1:
| |
 |
|
| |
|
CORE # |
AMCC-1775 |
a
(mm)
|
33.0±1.0 |
b
(mm) |
40.5±0.5 |
c
(mm) |
106.30±1.25 |
d
(mm) |
142.00±1.5 |
e*
(mm) |
106.5±2.5 |
f*
(mm) |
172.6+4.0 |
Lm*
(cm) |
39.72 |
Ac*
(cm2) |
39.36 |
Core
Wt.±2%
(gm)
|
11466.0 |
Window
Area
(cm2)
|
43.05 |
|
 |
|
The material, known
as Metglas, was
commercialized in
early 1980s and used
for low-loss power
distribution
transformers
(Amorphous metal
transformer).
Metglas-2605 is
composed of 80% iron
and 20% boron, has
Curie temperature of
373 °C and a room
temperature
saturation
magnetization of
125.7 milliteslas.
An amorphous metal
is a metallic
material with a
disordered
atomic-scale
structure. In
contrast to most
metals, which are
crystalline and
therefore have a
highly ordered
arrangement of
atoms, amorphous
alloys are
non-crystalline.
Materials in which
such a disordered
structure is
produced directly
from the liquid
state during cooling
are called
"glasses", and so
amorphous metals are
commonly referred to
as "metallic
glasses" or "glassy
metals". However,
there are several
other ways in which
amorphous metals can
be produced,
including physical
vapor deposition,
solid-state
reaction, ion
irradiation, melt
spinning, and
mechanical alloying.
Amorphous metals
produced by these
techniques are,
strictly speaking,
not glasses.
However, materials
scientists commonly
consider amorphous
alloys to be a
single class of
materials,
regardless of how
they are prepared.
In the past, small
batches of amorphous
metals have been
produced through a
variety of
quick-cooling
methods. For
instance, amorphous
metal wires have
been produced by
sputtering molten
metal onto a
spinning metal disk.
The rapid cooling,
on the order of
millions of degrees
a second, is too
fast for crystals to
form and the
material is "locked
in" a glassy state.
More recently a
number of alloys
with critical
cooling rates low
enough to allow
formation of
amorphous structure
in thick layers
(over 1 millimeter)
had been produced,
these are known as
bulk metallic
glasses (BMG).
Liquidmetal sells a
number of
titanium-based BMGs,
developed in studies
originally carried
out at Caltech. More
recently, batches of
amorphous steel have
been produced that
demonstrate
strengths much
greater than
conventional steel
alloys.
The alloys of
boron,
silicon,
phosphorus, and
other glass formers
with magnetic metals
(iron,
cobalt,
nickel) are
magnetic, with low
coercivity and
high
electrical
resistance. The
high resistance
leads to low losses
by
eddy currents
when subjected to
alternating magnetic
fields, a property
useful for eg.
transformer
magnetic cores.
Ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_metal
|
Typical
Impedance
Permeability
Curves & Typical
Core Loss
Curves: |
| |
|
General Properties & Characteristics |
| ELECTROMAGNETIC |
|
| Saturation Induction (T) |
|
As Cast
|
1.56 |
| Maximum DC Permeability (µ): |
Annealed (High Freq.)
|
600,000 |
As Cast
|
45,000 |
| Saturation Magnetostriction (ppm) |
27 |
| Electrical Resistivity (µ-cm) |
130 |
| Curie Temperature (°C) |
399 |
| |
| PHYSICAL |
| Thickness (mils) |
1.0 |
| Standard Available Widths |
|
|
Minimum (inches)
|
0.2 |
|
Maximum (inches)
|
8.4 |
| Density (g/m3) |
|
As Cast
|
7.18 |
| Vicker's Hardness (50g Load) |
900 |
| Tensile Strength (GPa) |
1-2 |
| Elastic Modulus (GPa) |
100-110 |
| Lamination Factor (%) |
>79 |
| Thermal Expansion (ppm/°C) |
7.6 |
| Crystallization Temperature (°C) |
508 |
| Continuous Service Temp. (°C) |
150 |
|
|
|
|

|

B
H Curve:

|
|
|
I got my cores from
http://www.uaml.net/.
The Contact there is
Vikas. He is very
helpful. Please mention
Chris from hyiq.org and
Vikas will help you out.
|
|
Aharonov-Bohm
Effect: |
Magnetic Aharonov–Bohm effect
The magnetic Aharonov–Bohm effect can be seen as a result of the requirement that quantum physics be invariant with respect to the gauge choice for the vector potential A. This implies that a particle with electric charge q travelling along some path P in a region with zero magnetic field ( ) must acquire a phase , given in SI units by
-
with a phase difference between any two paths with the same endpoints therefore determined by the magnetic flux Φ through the area between the paths (via Stokes' theorem and ), and given by:
-
-
This phase difference can be observed by placing a solenoid between the slits of a double-slit experiment (or equivalent). An ideal solenoid encloses a magnetic field B, but does not produce any magnetic field outside of its cylinder, and thus the charged particle (e.g. an electron) passing outside experiences no classical effect. However, there is a (curl-free) vector potential outside the solenoid with an enclosed flux, and so the relative phase of particles passing through one slit or the other is altered by whether the solenoid current is turned on or off. This corresponds to an observable shift of the interference fringes on the observation plane.
The same phase effect is responsible for the quantized-flux requirement in superconducting loops. This quantization is because the superconducting wave function must be single valued: its phase difference Δφ around a closed loop must be an integer multiple of 2π (with the charge q=2e for the electron Cooper pairs), and thus the flux Φ must be a multiple of h/2e. The superconducting flux quantum was actually predicted prior to Aharonov and Bohm, by London (1948) using a phenomenological model.
The magnetic Aharonov–Bohm effect is also closely related to Dirac's argument that the existence of a magnetic monopole necessarily implies that both electric and magnetic charges are quantized. A magnetic monopole implies a mathematical singularity in the vector potential, which can be expressed as an infinitely long Dirac string of infinitesimal diameter that contains the equivalent of all of the 4πg flux from a monopole "charge" g. Thus, assuming the absence of an infinite-range scattering effect by this arbitrary choice of singularity, the requirement of single-valued wave functions (as above) necessitates charge-quantization: must be an integer (in cgs units) for any electric charge q and magnetic charge g.
The magnetic Aharonov–Bohm effect was experimentally confirmed by Osakabe et al. (1986), following much earlier work summarized in Olariu and Popèscu (1984). Its scope and application continues to expand. Webb et al. (1985) demonstrated Aharonov–Bohm oscillations in ordinary, non-superconducting metallic rings; for a discussion, see Schwarzschild (1986) and Imry & Webb (1989). Bachtold et al. (1999) detected the effect in carbon nanotubes; for a discussion, see Kong et al. (2004).
Electric Aharonov–Bohm effect
Just as the phase of the wave function depends upon the magnetic vector potential, it also depends upon the scalar electric potential. By constructing a situation in which the electrostatic potential varies for two paths of a particle, through regions of zero electric field, an observable Aharonov–Bohm interference phenomenon from the phase shift has been predicted; again, the absence of an electric field means that, classically, there would be no effect.
From the Schrödinger equation, the phase of an eigenfunction with energy E goes as . The energy, however, will depend upon the electrostatic potential V for a particle with charge q. In particular, for a region with constant potential V (zero field), the electric potential energy qV is simply added to E, resulting in a phase shift:
-
where t is the time spent in the potential.
The initial theoretical proposal for this effect suggested an experiment where charges pass through conducting cylinders along two paths, which shield the particles from external electric fields in the regions where they travel, but still allow a varying potential to be applied by charging the cylinders. This proved difficult to realize, however. Instead, a different experiment was proposed involving a ring geometry interrupted by tunnel barriers, with a bias voltage V relating the potentials of the two halves of the ring. This situation results in an Aharonov–Bohm phase shift as above, and was observed experimentally in 1998.
Ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aharonov-Bohm_effect |
|
|
_____________________
To reach new
horizons...
|
|
|
Home
|
SQM
|
MEG |
About hyiq
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|