Free Energy from Motionless Electromagnetic Generator 2

[kenvlach]

Has any forum member heard of this?
The inventor, Tom Bearden, makes a bunch of free energy from active vacuum claims, based on
US Patent 6,362,718 (2002).

http://www.cheniere.org/

"The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator (MEG)
Has produced up to 100 times more power than was input, by extracting free energy from the vacuum. The MEG has been independently constructed, and its overunity performance independently replicated, by other researchers. US Patent awarded March 26, 2002."

http://www.cheniere.org/references/MEG_Patent.pdf

I checked the US Patent Office; this patent actually exists:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...,362,718.WKU.&OS=PN/6,362,718&RS=PN/6,362,718

Also claims
"U.S. Navy, General Electric and Stanford University used free energy system in 1930s. Network Analyzer was completely self-powered by negative resistor"

http://www.cheniere.org/misc/kron.htm

Sounds like Perpetual Motion to me.
Can someone look at the patent & explain what is wrong (where energy losses would occur).
Anyone understand the 'active vacuum' from which free energy can be extracted? [sounds like BS to me]
Ken

 

[VEBill]

Patents have become increasingly meaningless in recent years. There are some famous cases, for example:
1) the Comb-Over hairstyle (US Patent 4,022,227)
2) Sideways Swinging (US Patent 6,368,227)
3) The Wheel (

http://www.google.com/search?q=patent+wheel)

You'll know the technology is real when it's available on the open market in the form of a practical device. A 'negative resistor' would seem to be an ideal product that could be offered on a wee-hours infomercial.

As far as finding the flaw... wrestling with a pig gets you both dirty, but the pig actually enjoys it.

 

[kenvlach]

I agree with the comments, but isn't there a law against the Patent Office issuing patents on self-sustaining, perpetual motion devices? Where did the patent examiner slip up?

 

[buzzp]

Negative resistance can be created with an op amp amp but there is no value with some perpetual motion machine.

If this thing was around in '37 and actually offered some benefit, I am sure it would be widely used by now. Sorry I did not review the patent info to determine any fallacies. Patents can be issued on things that don't work too. Kind of like a UL label, it signifies it is safe to use but says nothing about working as designed.

 

[MrBananas]

The first post above said the device outputs 100 times more energy than is input...that makes it over-unity, not perpetual motion.

An amplifier also produces more power than is input from the signal source. It gets power from the supply. From what I understand about the theory behind these devices, they extract energy from a "supply," and make no claims to be perpetual motion.

 

[IRstuff]

There is no law. However, there is a standing rule at the USPTO to reject any patent that claims classic perpetual motion.

OTOH, the USPTO will allow patents where some energy source is present. Beyond that, as you probably know, USPTO does not specifically consider the actual merits of the design, i.e., does it work at all?

TTFN

 

[Warpspeed]

He has been touting this MEG thing for years, he just needs more money (a LOT more money !) to develop it. It is basically an electrical transformer with a permanent biasing magnet that mysteriously generates more measured electrical power in the secondary than in the primary.

Many of these supposed over unity electrical devices employ resonance to mysteriously generate energy from nothing. Resonant reactive power is beyond the understanding of many non engineers, and is seen as free energy creation.

After all, if you feed one watt into a resonant tank circuit, and can measure fifty circulating VAs, that is a power increase of x50. I am gona be rich !!!

He has never been able to demonstrate a free standing object that can permanently illuminate a few KW worth of light bulbs, for instance. From his claims, that should be easy.

Now free energy does exist ! Around the world yachtsmen can testify to that. Bearden claims an over unity electrical device which should be capable of powering itself with a surplus of extra free output.

I actually built one of these MEG devices myself many years ago out of curiosity, and saw nothing that could not be explained by conventional transformer theory, certainly no free energy. I was only able to recover around 70% of the input energy, and the losses could all be explained and accounted for.